For those who might think that Charlie Hebdo was a periodical that was a target for Islamists, then they probably don't know French publications.

This article may help you understand. http://blogs.mediapart.fr/blog/olivier-tonneau/110115/charlie-hebdo-letter-my-british-friends

Firstly, a few words on Charlie Hebdo, which was often “analyzed” in the British press on the sole basis, apparently, of a few selected cartoons. It might be worth knowing that the main target of Charlie Hebdo was the Front National and the Le Pen family. Next came crooks of all sorts, including bosses and politicians (incidentally, one of the victims of the shooting was an economist who ran a weekly column on the disasters caused by austerity policies in Greece). Finally, Charlie Hebdo was an opponent of all forms of organized religions, in the old-school anarchist sense: Ni Dieu, ni maître! They ridiculed the pope, orthodox Jews and Muslims in equal measure and with the same biting tone. They took ferocious stances against the bombings of Gaza. Even if their sense of humour was apparently inacceptable to English minds, please take my word for it: it fell well within the French tradition of satire – and after all was only intended for a French audience. It is only by reading or seeing it out of context that some cartoons appear as racist or islamophobic. Charlie Hebdo also continuously denounced the pledge of minorities and campaigned relentlessly for all illegal immigrants to be given permanent right of stay. I hope this helps you understand that if you belong to the radical left, you have lost precious friends and allies.

This being clear, the attack becomes all the more tragic and absurd: two young French Muslims of Arab descent have not assaulted the numerous extreme-right wing newspapers that exist in France (Minute, Valeurs Actuelles) who ceaselessly amalgamate Arabs, Muslims and fundamentalists, but the very newspaper that did the most to fight racism. And to me, the one question that this specific event raises is: how could these youth ever come to this level of confusion and madness? What feeds into fundamentalist fury? How can we fight it?

3,000 to 5,000 Europeans now a potential terrorist threat

On a population of 500 million people? Yeah, very scary, having to worry that 0.0001% of the population might be a terrorist.

Yes, its a problem. But its a problem we should be able to deal with. Tracking a few thousand people shouldn't be that hard for agencies that are tracking the entire internet.

Can governments ban encryption?

"Encryption is mathematics, not technology. It can't be suppressed by law," Mr Bloch told the BBC."

Leave it to Cameron to talk bloated nonsense again. He wants to ban encryption? Guess he didn't realize that basically means banning the internet.

Yes, its a problem. But its a problem we should be able to deal with. Tracking a few thousand people shouldn't be that hard for agencies that are tracking the entire internet.

OK.

First of all, thats nonsense. All I'm asking of them is that they don't just go ahead and breach everyones privacy. I don't need to know who they are monitoring as potential terrorists, I don't need to know their methods, I dont need to know about who works for them. So they can still do their job effectively. Second of all, lets be clear here, they have overstepped their bounds. They have betrayed the publics trust by setting up a surveillance system that can best be described as 'Orwellian'.

You are the biggest hypocrite on the face of this planet.

The point was that if a government agency can monitor everyone on the internet, then surely it should be a walk in the park to monitor only 5000 people. After all, it seems a lot easier to track 5000 people as opposed to 500 million people.

What is this?
All the women in the photo of the Je suis Charlie march have been erased in an Israeli newspaper.
The women who have been erased include German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo and EU foreign policy and security chief Frederica Mogherini. Denmark's Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt has been cropped so that only her hand is visible in one corner of the image.
https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=sv&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dn.se%2Fnyheter%2Fvarlden%2Falla-kvinnor-pa-foto-av-terrormarschen-bortsuddade%2F&edit-text=

Al Qaeda in Yemen assumes responsibility for the attack against the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris. The reason is said to be revenge for the newspaper has insulted the Prophet Muhammad. "The operation was carried out in accordance with Osama bin Laden's wish," said Nasser bin Ali al-Ansi in a new video.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/charlie-hebdo-paris-attacks-al-qaeda-4976154

Surely there is a lot more to investigating terrorist suspects than monitoring their internet and mobile phone activity.

What if they use good old methods like face to face briefings in wide open spaces, or dead letter boxes etc.

If they are really a threat then they need to be monitored and observed 24/7, that takes a lot of manpower and resources. I wouldn't be surprised if the bill to keep one suspect under 24/7 observation for a year topped £1 million.

The satirical magazine's latest cover features a seemingly saddened Mohammed holding a “Je Suis Charlie” sign with the headline “Tout est Pardonné”

Yes, its a problem. But its a problem we should be able to deal with. Tracking a few thousand people shouldn't be that hard for agencies that are tracking the entire internet.

The point was that if a government agency can monitor everyone on the internet, then surely it should be a walk in the park to monitor only 5000 people. After all, it seems a lot easier to track 5000 people as opposed to 500 million people.

So answer this: -

"It is also worth noting, he added, that the men involved in the Paris shootings were known to the authorities and had been under surveillance until it was deemed that the threat from them had lessened.!

Yes, its a problem. But its a problem we should be able to deal with. Tracking a few thousand people shouldn't be that hard for agencies that are tracking the entire internet.

The point was that if a government agency can monitor everyone on the internet, then surely it should be a walk in the park to monitor only 5000 people. After all, it seems a lot easier to track 5000 people as opposed to 500 million people.

So answer this: -

"It is also worth noting, he added, that the men involved in the Paris shootings were known to the authorities and had been under surveillance until it was deemed that the threat from them had lessened.!

Was that because Mr. Snowden told them what communications channels were being monitored, so they switched to other unmonitored channels and put false happy messages on the monitored channels?

They are dead now, so we can't waterboard this out of them ......

---

I am charlie

was a bad thing the terrorists did .

Play Devil advocate : What did they expect when you use what is a insult and then claim it to be satire or freedom of speech

Charlie Hebdo would not be able to print what they have been printing here in Australia .

It would come under the anti discrimination act of the federal and state government , and be classed as religious vilification under state law but not federal as that only covers racial vilification .

Those calming that Charlie Hebdo has the right under freedom of the press or freedom of speech is wrong .

As for the Americans whom will try and criticize me for saying theses things i will remind them to say nothing or i will show how you are hypocrite's on this subject by reminding you what you did and said when a t/v station here show'd the 25th aniversary of HEY HEY IT'S SATURDAY and asked the very first act that was on the show , in the very first episode of this show to come back .

1 cartoon once in say 12 months you can call satire but repeated cartoons in a short time borders on religious vilification

Freedom of the press is not the same as freedom of speech which people do not have as there are laws about defamation , slander , libel unless you can prove what you are saying .

If you know your bible then this subject is coverd better by the ten commandments than any law of man .

Do not give false witness about your nabour

Do unto others which you do not wish done to you .

---

I am charlie

was a bad thing the terrorists did .

Play Devil advocate : What did they expect when you use what is a insult and then claim it to be satire or freedom of speech

Charlie Hebdo would not be able to print what they have been printing here in Australia .

It would come under the anti discrimination act of the federal and state government , and be classed as religious vilification under state law but not federal as that only covers racial vilification .

Those calming that Charlie Hebdo has the right under freedom of the press or freedom of speech is wrong .

As for the Americans whom will try and criticize me for saying theses things i will remind them to say nothing or i will show how you are hypocrite's on this subject by reminding you what you did and said when a t/v station here show'd the 25th aniversary of HEY HEY IT'S SATURDAY and asked the very first act that was on the show , in the very first episode of this show to come back .

1 cartoon once in say 12 months you can call satire but repeated cartoons in a short time borders on religious vilification

Freedom of the press is not the same as freedom of speech which people do not have as there are laws about defamation , slander , libel unless you can prove what you are saying .

If you know your bible then this subject is coverd better by the ten commandments than any law of man .

Do not give false witness about your nabour

Do unto others which you do not wish done to you .

I assume you read the article linked a few posts earlier

http://blogs.mediapart.fr/blog/olivier-tonneau/110115/charlie-hebdo-letter-my-british-friends

---

Actually no Bernie i have not read any articles like that .It is my own opinion i don't troll news services in fact if i did not post here i would never read them .

I am not saying what those guys did is correct either . 2 wrongs don't make a rite.

---

Pope Francis regarding Paris killings:
"Those who make fun or toy with other people’s religions, these people provoke and can expect violence
If a friend insults my mother, he’s going to get a punch
One cannot kill in the name of God, but one cannot insult other people’s faith”
https://twitter.com/francisxrocca

Yes. But murder people like that for an insult:(

Oxford University Press bans mention of pork and pigs in books to 'avoid offending Muslims or Jews'
Pigs plus sausages, or anything else which could be perceived as pork.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/oxford-university-press-bans-mention-pork-pigs-books-avoid-offending-muslims-jews-1483378
Where will it end?

If the Pope, the Bishop of Rome and the leader of the worldwide Catholic Church, currently Pope Francis, born Jorge Mario Bergoglio, has truly said this, then that is disgraceful, and he should be kicked out without delay. Or is this as I suspect, a scam.

How lovely, the pope uses his right of free speech but since you don't like it, he should lose his job over it. My my, I don't think you understand the concept of free speech.

This was the post that I replied to.

"Those who make fun or toy with other people’s religions, these people provoke and can expect violence
If a friend insults my mother, he’s going to get a punch

I said that

If the Pope, the Bishop of Rome and the leader of the worldwide Catholic Church, currently Pope Francis, born Jorge Mario Bergoglio, has truly said this,

It appears that he didn't actually say that after all. If he had done, then my comment stands.

Interesting. Do (did?) like him.
If these comments are accurate...

Perhaps much ado about nothing.

In an email, Vatican spokesman Thomas Rosica told CNN that "the Pope's expression is in no way intended to be interpreted" as somehow justifying last week's violence, and he pointed out that "the Pope has spoken out clearly against the terror and violence that occurred in Paris and in other parts of the world."

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/15/world/pope-francis-punch/

French Comedian Faces Trial Over Online Comments

http://www.wsj.com/articles/charlie-hebdo-french-comedian-detained-over-online-comments-1421229693

Pope on Charlie Hebdo: There are limits to free expression

"If my good friend Dr. Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch," Francis said, throwing a pretend punch his way. "It's normal. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others."

http://news.yahoo.com/pope-charlie-hebdo-limits-free-expression-121639260.html

Watch out to ALL those Anti-Christian Bigots: The Roman Catholic Jihadists will KILL YOU.

ALL PROTECTED FREE SPEECH is, of course, Offensive. Why else would it need protection.

To those Primitive Thinking Poster's, in this Thread -

Your Allies are Religious Fanatics.

To those living in Australia, France, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, et al, who believe the same:

First: Anti-Religious speech is censored.

Second: Your speech is censored.

All "Free Speech" means is that the government cannot imprison you for what you say. It does not protect you from the consequences of what you say and it doesn't mean that any platform has to allow you use them to preach your message.

There seems to be a myth about that Christian or Jewish leaders protect free speech. In some countries it is illegal to deny the holocaust.

Would you defend the rights of holocaust deniers as avidly as you defend the rights of anti Muslim propagandists?

---

Reality Internet Personality

All "Free Speech" means is that the government cannot imprison you for what you say. It does not protect you from the consequences of what you say and it doesn't mean that any platform has to allow you use them to preach your message.

There seems to be a myth about that Christian or Jewish leaders protect free speech. In some countries it is illegal to deny the holocaust.

Would you defend the rights of holocaust deniers as avidly as you defend the rights of anti Muslim propagandists?

I 'Lost' Jewish Relatives in The Holocaust. We don't know exactly how they were murdered by The NAZI's.

My Jewish Grandmother, who raised me and my sister, would cry over B&W photo's of her Murdered Sister's.

WE in America (unlike the rest of The World), defend the Rights of NAZI's, Marxists, Holocaust Denier's, and other vile and evil People/Organizations.

Answer your question?

Yes...but bear in mind when making your generalisations about Christians etc that America is not the sole arbiter of Christian view points..and there also seems to be little agreement in America either. After all, Christians go around blowing up abortion clinics. Although that is not a free speech issue, it does show that Christian fanatics can be just as hateful and vile as any other religious fanatic.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Happy New Year Chris!

---

I hardly ever stumble into Politics but when I made my above comment it started out as a reply at the Café and now I have been sucked in! :)

I expected there to already be a thread here in Politics, maybe with a sensationalist title like "Paris Killings" (or maybe I'm being too harsh on you guys). I must say I find it odd there wasn't one before this.

Just to clarify (not that it matters anymore; the way the thread played out it obviously belongs in Politics) what I was trying to say in my previous comment:

-If a piece of news makes me sad, then it should be in the Café.
-If a piece of news makes me mad, then it should be in Politics.
or
-If I want a light-hearted discussion on a potentially serious/controversial subject I'd hope to be able to keep it in the Café (with clear instructions in my first post that political comments are unwelcome).

Of course if I wanted to create a hot-potato thread in the Café and expect it stay there, I know I'd have to watch it like a hawk. But anyway, all rhetorical now (especially seeing as OP was hit and run).

---

As the rest of the thread discusses Nazis right now, I'd like to go back to the Pope quote. I liked it. It shows flexibility rather than dogma which I think is refreshing and exactly what the planet needs right now from its religious leaders and followers. I'd also like to believe that if one of the HEBDO crew got punched in the face by anyone, they would smile and say "fair enough".

Your Allies are Religious Fanatics.

To those living in Australia, France, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, et al, who believe the same:

I figured you would be the idiot to come out with B/S maybe you should have read my post better grumpy

So let prove that America is a hypocrite shall we

. You call what Charlie Hebdo is doing satire and that's ok .

Well maybe you can explain why when Hey Hey It's Saturday ask the act where 2 men dressed as golly wogs in a comedy skit was wrong and not satire but what Charlie Hebdo does is satire ?

Your hypocrites with big mouths as it's ok for Charlie Hebdo to print offensive cartoons but not ok for 2 men to do a golly wog skit on a comedy show

what was some of the comments on your news services and talk back shows used

It's Racial Vilification , Offensive , racist , they should apologize

read my lips $%^& ^&& you hypocrite's

America = Hypocrite

As another User here states it's ok to insult others but if i started to say the holocaust did not happen then the screams from all the jews and the hypocrite Yanks would be deafening

So i'm not surprised the biggest mouth is a Jew

---

I really never thought that this project's forums would ever get this bad, unfortunately, I have to finally admit, I was dreaming.

I'm currently crunching WCG, but when those tasks complete, I'm gone, not just from this project but boinc itself.

Unlike others, I won't be back as I have better things to do with both my time & life. For those of you who actually know me, should you ever bump into me at any time, walk away!