Poll of the Day > France has been pretty great lately

(+) Yeah! (+)

Hard for me to admit because I usually hate the French, but they've been doing good shit lately.

President Marcon has some big balls to call out the muslim communities hypocrisy.

For those of you who arent in the know, muslims worldwide are protesting France's "apparent hate of their religion" in allowing muhammed to be depicted in cartoon form again. Meanwhile, China is committing genocide on millions of muslims and they dont seem to be protesting that. The fact that Marcon was actually willing to publicly point out that hypocrisy is fucking rare from the leaders in that part of the world, and i applaud him.

---

Noop_Noop posted...

Hard for me to admit because I usually hate the French, but they've been doing good shit lately.

President Marcon has some big balls to call out the muslim communities hypocrisy.

For those of you who arent in the know, muslims worldwide are protesting France's "apparent hate of their religion" in allowing muhammed to be depicted in cartoon form again. Meanwhile, China is committing genocide on millions of muslims and they dont seem to be protesting that. The fact that Marcon was actually willing to publicly point out that hypocrisy is fucking rare from the leaders in that part of the world, and i applaud him.

Yes

---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

*In before this is modded.*

Be a pretty stupid topic to mod.

I have gotten away with saying much worse

---

Ya, it's kinda weird... given stuff like this is said

https://swarajyamag.com/insta/muslims-have-a-right-to-be-angry-and-kill-millions-of-french-people-says-ex-malaysian-pm-mahathir-mohamad

---

Lokarin posted...

Ya, it's kinda weird... given stuff like this is said

https://swarajyamag.com/insta/muslims-have-a-right-to-be-angry-and-kill-millions-of-french-people-says-ex-malaysian-pm-mahathir-mohamad

Yeah, it's almost as if they only have the balls to say this about countries that actually value free speech, since china would almost certainly just tell them to go screw. So yeah, ignore the genocide, focus on the cartoon.

---

Noop_Noop posted...

The fact that Marcon was actually willing to publicly point out that hypocrisy is fucking rare from the leaders in that part of the world, and i applaud him.

Can I get a link/source? Casual google search didnt pick up what he said, very interested to learn more

Meanwhile, Canadian cucklord Justin Trudeau says Free Speech has Limits in response to these attacks....

...I didn't know murdering people was a Free Speech issue

---

Good for Macron! Did France really enact a literal "blasphemy law" prohibiting the depiction of Mohammed? That's so super fucking fucked up, if so.

Now, maybe he'll really grow a spine and point out the hypocrisy of condemning Israel for their "treatment of Palestinians" despite: a) Palestinians having better and safer lives in Israel than under Hamas and b) the fact that Israel is protecting itself from endless bouts of rocket attacks, bombing attempts, and other terrorist attacks on its civilian population from Palestinians.

...I'm not holding my breath waiting on that one....

Noop_Noop posted...

Meanwhile, China is committing genocide on millions of muslims and they dont seem to be protesting that. The fact that Marcon was actually willing to publicly point out that hypocrisy is fucking rare from the leaders in that part of the world, and i applaud him.

Oh, they're doing worse than not protesting it.
A majority of Muslin-lead countries signed a letter a few years ago defending China for their actions!
While out of the other side of their mouth continuing to bash Israel. You can't even make this shit up, it's so insane.

EDIT: source
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-mass-detentions-uighur-muslims-un-letter-human-rights-a9003281.html

Ambassadors of 37 states from Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America praised Chinas contribution to the international human rights cause in the letter sent to the UN's Human Rights Council on Friday.
The states, including prominent members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, said China had faced terrorism, separatism and religious extremism in Xinjiang.
But the signatories said China had restored peace and security in the region through counterterrorism measures and vocational training.
We note with appreciation that human rights are respected and protected in China in the process of counterterrorism and de-radicalisation, the letter read.

On one hand, people depicting Muhammed is pretty invariably purely an effort to troll Muslims, with no actual creative, informative, or other tangible value, so condemning that is reasonable. On the other hand, the only reason Islam prohibits Muhammad's depiction is to prevent those depictions from being worshipped as idols (which is actually a pretty reasonable philosophy to follow to help keep the focus on the teachings and not the man), so the fact that so many Muslims effectively worship the absence of such depictions - especially to the point of violence against anyone who defames that particular idol - is really stupid and completely misses the point and they really need to stop being so stupid about it.

---

Lokarin posted...

Meanwhile, Canadian cucklord Justin Trudeau says Free Speech has Limits in response to these attacks....

...I didn't know murdering people was a Free Speech issue

I just looked that up. You took it out of context.

He condemned violence and supported the freedom of expression of the cartoonist. But he also said targeting minority groups for the purpose of aggravating them goes against the spirit of pluralism and tolerance.

Obviously the Islamist reaction to this is far, FAR worse than depicting Muhammad in a cartoon. If I had to pick a side to stand on, I would unquestionably stand with the French. But intolerance of all forms, however minor, should be discouraged. I don't believe the cartoons qualify as hate speech, but I'd question the motives of someone that would purposely make or seek out them.

---

faramir77 posted...

I just looked that up. You took it out of context.

I'm good at out of context - I interpretted his spiel as that murder was part of religious expression and that the murderer should have reigned it in

---

Lokarin posted...

I'm good at out of context - I interpretted his spiel as that murder was part of religious expression and that the murderer should have reigned it in

And to be fair to you, "freedom of expression has limits" is a really shitty way of expressing what he meant. Trudeau isn't exactly known for having an eloquent way with words.

---

streamofthesky posted...

Oh, they're doing worse than not protesting it.
A majority of Muslin-lead countries signed a letter a few years ago defending China for their actions!
While out of the other side of their mouth continuing to bash Israel. You can't even make this shit up, it's so insane.

EDIT: source
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-mass-detentions-uighur-muslims-un-letter-human-rights-a9003281.html

That's surreal.

adjl posted...

On one hand, people depicting Muhammed is pretty invariably purely an effort to troll Muslims, with no actual creative, informative, or other tangible value, so condemning that is reasonable.

Well, the problem with freedoms is that somebody will always use those freedoms to be an asshole, but that usually doesn't justify taking freedoms away. But apparently thinking freedom of expression -- something that people have sought throughout the past few thousand years -- is good makes you a bad guy nowadays.


---

What exactly did France expect by having their population be around 10% Islamic? Sunshine and rainbows?

adjl posted...

On one hand, people depicting Muhammed is pretty invariably purely an effort to troll Muslims, with no actual creative, informative, or other tangible value, so condemning that is reasonable.

um, no. exercising your free speech, even for its own sake, is just fine and should not be "condemned". especially if people are not just threatening but actively *taking* lives in response. there is no freedom of speech without offence; that's what it is. someone escalating that offence into murder doesn't and in fact shouldn't change that.

---

TheWorstPoster posted...

What exactly did France expect by having their population be around 10% Islamic? Sunshine and rainbows?

Just when I think you cant say anything stupider you outdo yourself.

To say that Muslims have said nothing about Chinas persecution of Uighurs is really disingenuous

---

FatalAccident posted...

To say that Muslims have said nothing about Chinas persecution of Uighurs is really disingenuous

Doubly so if you count the Uighurs as said Muslims... pretty sure they are speaking out for themselves by default

---

Sahuagin posted...

um, no. exercising your free speech, even for its own sake, is just fine and should not be "condemned".

Bearing in mind that "dude, you're an asshole" counts as "condemning" it. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences for that speech, including judgements of your character. That does not in any way mean that murdering people over it is okay, but calling people douches for being douches is very much fair game.

Zeus posted...

That's surreal.

Without looking into it in any great detail, I'd assume it's a similar situation to the whole Sunni/Shiite Muslim thing, where one is persecuting the other (can't remember which was which) for being an inferior sect of Islam. If that's the case and the Uighurs are a similarly disenfranchised minority among Muslims, I could see the dominant denomination wilfully disregarding their suffering.

---

adjl posted...

Bearing in mind that "dude, you're an asshole" counts as "condemning" it. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences for that speech, including judgements of your character. That does not in any way mean that murdering people over it is okay, but calling people douches for being douches is very much fair game.

I'm 50/50 on you there... because I believe in free speech being also free of consequence, but calling a douche a douche is also fair game because that's just THEIR free speech in action

---

Lokarin posted...

I'm 50/50 on you there... because I believe in free speech being also free of consequence, but calling a douche a douche is also fair game because that's just THEIR free speech in action

You can't have speech - free or otherwise - be free of consequence. So long as words mean anything, saying things will have consequences.

---

adjl posted...

You can't have speech - free or otherwise - be free of consequence. So long as words mean anything, saying things will have consequences.

Well ya, but since 'consequence' could mean lots of things the context matters and I'm horrible at context...

Like, A consequence of speech is someone hearing it... at all, even if they don't care. Shouting into the void might even have consequences 'cuz of, like, vibrations or something.

But typically when I say free of consequences I mean someone is not allowed to pimp-slap you if you call them a bitch

---

Lokarin posted...

But typically when I say free of consequences I mean someone is not allowed to pimp-slap you if you call them a b****

That's the basic crux of "don't stifle free speech with violence." Violence is far from the only possible negative consequence, though. You're perfectly free to stifle free speech by not being somebody's friend anymore, or firing them (within certain permissible parameters), or telling them to stop being a dick.

---

adjl posted...

Without looking into it in any great detail, I'd assume it's a similar situation to the whole Sunni/Shiite Muslim thing, where one is persecuting the other (can't remember which was which) for being an inferior sect of Islam. If that's the case and the Uighurs are a similarly disenfranchised minority among Muslims, I could see the dominant denomination wilfully disregarding their suffering.

And that makes it better...how?

In any case, I'm sure it's financial reasons. China does a lot of business w/ those countries and is pretty infamously known for, especially in Africa, giving financial aid and "sweetheart deals" without any strings attached pushing for stuff like democracy and the governments of those countries not brutalizing their own people and such. The pesky kind of stuff the U.S. typically pushes for when it provides aid.

adjl posted...

Bearing in mind that "dude, you're an asshole" counts as "condemning" it. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences for that speech, including judgements of your character. That does not in any way mean that murdering people over it is okay, but calling people douches for being douches is very much fair game.

there's a difference between saying "that was not nice" and "you ought not to have said that". which are you claiming here? the whole point is that free speech may not be nice but that doesn't mean that it ought not to have been said. that's what free speech is.

in the context that the speech in question is not being protected by threats of violence, and *actual* violence, then maybe there would be little more to it than being a jerk by saying it; but there's a really important issue to push against here by making such statements; no one should EVER be afraid to draw a picture of a 'deity' due to real threats of violence. that situation should not even be a thing, and pushing back against it is the morally right thing to do.

---

This has to be some of the most blatant support of tyranny to date, Macron is not a good politician, he's worse than DeBlasio.
---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Jesus Tap-dancing Christ! Fuck that God forsaken human doormat!

faramir77 posted...

I just looked that up. You took it out of context.

He condemned violence and supported the freedom of expression of the cartoonist. But he also said targeting minority groups for the purpose of aggravating them goes against the spirit of pluralism and tolerance.

---

Noop_Noop posted...

The fact that Marcon was actually willing to publicly point out that hypocrisy is fucking rare from the leaders in that part of the world, and i applaud him.

You mean people are willing to criticize the French more than they are the country that manufactures almost all of their products? You don't say.

---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Regardless, if it was a cartoon making fun of Jesus or Buddha, nobody would of died.

Would of? WOULD OF?!

---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Regardless, if it was a cartoon making fun of Jesus or Buddha, nobody would of died.

yeah, because Christianity is the poster child for a religion of peace lmao

Can you even make fun of Buddha? Isn't the "fat" depiction of Buddha a creation of Buddhists themselves?

---

This is what Muhammad the prophet actually looks like.

:)

^Muhammad the Prophet.

Please mod me.

Hop103 posted...

This has to be some of the most blatant support of tyranny to date, Macron is not a good politician, he's worse than DeBlasio.

...lolwut? Tyranny is giving people the freedom to draw something?

---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Don't make me point to my sig.

I mean, youre regularly wrong soooooo

streamofthesky posted...

And that makes it better...how?

It doesn't make it okay, but it explains it with a bit more nuance than "lol Muslims are just hypocrites" or "Muslim people don't care about their fellow Muslims being tortured and killed." Hypothetically, anyway, since that's really just speculation on my part and may not be remotely true.

Sahuagin posted...

there's a difference between saying "that was not nice" and "you ought not to have said that".

Not really. At least, not under the general philosophy that people should be nice to each other, which is generally a pretty decent way to live your life and form behavioural standards for the people you surround yourself with. Free speech does not mean people can't tell you that it would have been better if you hadn't said something. It just means people can't prohibit you from saying it.

Sahuagin posted...

in the context that the speech in question is not being protected by threats of violence, and *actual* violence, then maybe there would be little more to it than being a jerk by saying it; but there's a really important issue to push against here by making such statements; no one should EVER be afraid to draw a picture of a 'deity' due to real threats of violence. that situation should not even be a thing, and pushing back against it is the morally right thing to do.

Well, yeah. But one can very easily say "you're really just being a dick" while also saying "but nobody should be trying to kill you for it." The two are in no way mutually exclusive.

---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Calm down grammar nazi.

Yeah, I was being facetious there. English grammar is stupid.

Good call on this topic being deleted though, Nostradamus.

---

Zeus posted...

...lolwut? Tyranny is giving people the freedom to draw something?

I'm talking about the lockdown he instituted.
---

Sarcasthma posted...

Yeah, I was being facetious there. English grammar is stupid.

Good call on this topic being deleted though, Nostradamus.

Its almost like you told him he was wrong and he is. Glad his sig is accurate.

Yeah, good for France indeed

---

adjl posted...

Not really.

yes, really. that's the whole point. free speech is speech that someone somewhere doesn't want to hear. if you can't separate "someone doesn't want to hear that" from "that should not be said" then you don't even have a grasp of what free speech is.

adjl posted...

But one can very easily say "you're really just being a dick" while also saying "but nobody should be trying to kill you for it."

and again you're jumping over "you are morally obligated not to say that", which "you're being a jerk" does not imply.

really, though "you're really just being a dick" doesn't even say anything; that's a meaningless unquantified statement. not to mention it just means that you've made yourself the subjective arbiter of what is or isn't acceptable to say, for everyone.

you're completely missing that there's a difference between "I don't like that" and "that should not exist", which is a pretty important distinction.

---

Cacciato posted...

Its almost like you told him he was wrong and he is. Glad his sig is accurate.

I wonder how many times it took of people here telling him he's wrong before he changed his sig to that. :p

---

Maybe soon they'll realize how terrible of an idea it was to bring them all in in the first place.

---

Noop_Noop posted...

Meanwhile, China is committing genocide on millions of muslims and they dont seem to be protesting that.

Why would they protest something happening in another country to people who arent them?

How often do you go to protests for the sake of citizens from other countries? Is this something citizens are supposed to do?

---

PK_Spam posted...

Why would they protest something happening in another country to people who arent them?

How often do you go to protests for the sake of citizens from other countries? Is this something citizens are supposed to do?

I think TC is going on the basis that Muslims are one monolithic mass who protest every injustice to Muslims around the world no matter what and if they deviate from that then theyre hypocrites.

In any case, its not true, there are Muslims and non-Muslims from all over the world who have called out Chinas bs. The problem is no foreign government has big enough balls to call them out directly or actively do anything about it.

Also TCs point kind of goes something like: Muslims are hypocrites for complaining about the french drawing Mohammed yet they dont complain about Muslims half way across the world being persecuted. Despite that the latter isnt even true, Muslims are much more likely to be pissed off at you actively antagonising them by depicting someone whos clearly not supposed to be depicted in the first place and everyone knows it.

What I dont understand is people complaining about free speech. Unless you can name me one legit tangible benefit to actually drawing a caricature of Mohammed, then its purely antagonising for the sake of it.

Threat of terrorist retaliation aside, freedom of speech isnt an excuse to be an asshole. You cant go around intentionally offending people for the sake of offensiveness sake just so you can run and hide under the guise of freedom of speech. Intentionally causing offence for the sake of it is just as hateful

---

FatalAccident posted...

Unless you can name me one legit tangible benefit to actually drawing a caricature of Mohammed

there are legit tangible benefits to being able to do that; and/or conversely, there are legit tangible disadvantages to being prevented from doing things like that

FatalAccident posted...

its purely antagonising for the sake of it

it isn't necessarily, but even "antagonising for the sake of it" should be allowed (because who's to say whether it is or not in any particular situation); you can dislike someone who does that, but you shouldn't be able to prevent them from doing it.

FatalAccident posted...

freedom of speech isnt an excuse to be an asshole

it doesn't make you not an asshole, but yes, you should be allowed to be one

FatalAccident posted...

You cant go around intentionally offending people for the sake of offensiveness sake just so you can run and hide under the guise of freedom of speech.

you can, actually, not that anyone is doing that necessarily.

do you realize that this all applies just as equally to something like making fun of the president, or celebrities? should memes involving real people be outlawed, because how dare you mock people?

you don't have to like it, but that doesn't mean it ought not to be.

---