I'd Rather Die Standing Than Live on My Knees - Charlie Hebdo Pays the Price for Free Speech

[kawilt]

Interesting sidebar: And conspiracy theories:
Police Commissioner Involved in Charlie Hebdo Investigation “Commits Suicide”. Total News Blackout
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, January 11, 2015

Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/police-commissioner-involved-in-charlie-hebdo-investigation-commits-suicide-total-news-blackout/5424149



Police Commissioner Helric Fredou, Number Two Police Officer of the Regional Service of France’s Judicial Police (JP), Limoges, (Haute-Vienne), “committed suicide on the night of Wednesday to Thursday at the police station.”

Commissioner Helric Fredou was part of the police investigation into the Charlie Hebdo terror attack.

Terror suspects Cherif and Said Kouachi who were shot dead by police on January 9, spent their high-school years in the Limoges region. No doubt this was the object of Fredou’s police investigation. Yet police and media reports state that on that same Wednesday he was involved in a meeting with the family of one of the Charlie Hebdo victims.

On Wednesday, as part of the Charlie Hebdo investigation, he dispatched a team of police officials under his jurisdiction. He is reported to have waited for the return of his team for a debriefing. Immediately following the police debriefing, he was involved in preparing his police report.



According to media reports, he committed suicide at around 1am on Thursday, within hours of the police debriefing. He used his own police weapon, a SIG-Sauer to “shoot himself in the head”.

At the time of his death, police claim to have not known the reason for his alleged suicide. This was reflected in their official statements to the media: “It is unknown at this time the reasons for his actions”.

However, a back story appears to have been inserted simultaneously, most likely from the very same police media liaisons, who then told the press that Fredou was ‘depressed and overworked’. For any law enforcement officer in France, it would seem rather odd that anyone would want to miss the biggest single terror event of the century, or history in the making, as it were. (21st Century Wire,)

”An autopsy was performed at the University Hospital of Limoges, “confirming the suicide”

There has been a total news blackout.

The French media decided or was instructed not to cover the incident. Not news worthy? So much for “Je suis Charlie” and ”Freedom of Expression” in journalism.

Likewise, the Western media including all major news services (AP, AFP, Reuters, Deutsche Welle, etc) have not covered the issue.

One isolated report in Le Parisien presents the act of suicide as being totally unrelated to the Charlie Hebdo investigation.

While described as being depressive and suffering from a burnout, police reports state that Helric Fredou’s suicide was totally unexpected.

Moreover, it is worth noting that, according to reports, he committed suicide in his workplace, in his office at the police station.

Did he commit suicide? Was he incited to commit suicide?

Or was he an “honest Cop” executed on orders of France’s judicial police?

Has his report been released?

These are issues for France’s journalists to address. It’s called investigative reporting. Or is it outright media censorship?

 

[Millard]

Charlie Hebdo continues uninterrupted with next issue out on Wednesday:

Source: http://www.liberation.fr/societe/2015/01/12/mahomet-en-une-du-charlie-hebdo-de-mercredi_1179193

 

[heady muscle]

His comments have regrettably been compared to former President Bush's post-9/11 war on terrorism speech.

Instead of being in fear of the terrorists, Americans should have been afraid of what the government would do to its own people in terms of using the new "war" as a pretense to erode the freedom and liberties of its citizens.

This is spot on!

 

[heady muscle]

The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot By Naomi Wolf

The steps are:

1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy.
2. Create secret prisons where torture takes place.
3. Develop a thug caste or paramilitary force not answerable to citizens.
4. Set up an internal surveillance system.
5. Harass citizens' groups.
6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release.
7. Target key individuals.
8. Control the press.
9. Cast criticism as espionage and dissent as treason.
10. Subvert the rule of law.[3]

 

[kawilt]

The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot By Naomi Wolf

The steps are:

1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy.
2. Create secret prisons where torture takes place.
3. Develop a thug caste or paramilitary force not answerable to citizens.
4. Set up an internal surveillance system.
5. Harass citizens' groups.
6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release.
7. Target key individuals.
8. Control the press.
9. Cast criticism as espionage and dissent as treason.
10. Subvert the rule of law.[3]

Thanks heady muscle,all of these have taken place in one form or another over the years.

 

[heady muscle]

Thanks heady muscle,all of these have taken place in one form or another over the years.

Step by Step, inch by inch... we are all becoming slaves to the corporate regime. World wide. New World Order!

 

[heady muscle]

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.”
― George Orwell, 1984

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

Global Research, January 11, 2015

(a fragrant dollup of eau de horse is mercifully excised)

These are issues for France’s journalists to address. It’s called investigative reporting. Or is it outright media censorship?

Oh, Kawilt. We can always count on you to bring paranoid nonsense from the lunatic fringe, but lets try to keep this thread based in reality, shall we?


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca

"While many of Globalresearch's articles discuss legitimate humanitarian or environmental concerns, the site has a strong undercurrent of reality warping throughout its pages, especially in relation to taking its news from sources such as Russia Today. Its view of science, the economy and geopolitics seems to be broadly conspiracist.

Whenever someone makes a remarkable claim and cites Globalresearch, they are almost certainly wrong

What it really is
Despite presenting itself as a source of scholarly analysis, Globalresearch mostly consists of polemics many of which accept (and use) conspiracy theories, pseudoscience and propaganda. The prevalent conspiracist strand relates to global power-elites (primarily governments and corporations) and their New World Order.[2] Specific featured conspiracy theories include those addressing 9/11,[3] vaccines,[4] genetic modification,[5] Zionism,[6][7] HAARP,[8] global warming,[9][10] Bosnian genocide denialism[11] chemtrails,[12] and David Kelly.[13]

Globalresearch contributors are happy to source information from anyone who seems vaguely aligned with their ideology; during the 2011 Libyan civil war the site was an apologist for Muammar al-Gaddafi,[14] reproducing his propaganda and painting him as a paragon of a modern leader. In the 2014 Ukrainian crisis the site is taking the standard "anti-globalisation" stance against the Western side and falling into the ranks of imperial Russian propaganda instead.

It's no surprise then that the site has long become a magnet for radicals, fringe figures and whacko elements from the left in general."​

 

[Millard]

The Charlie Hebdo incident will get the whole Nationalist front movement rolling through Europe. Germany's party had 15k at their last rally the one next week I believe they are expecting 10x that number. It is getting eerily dangerous in Europe........AGAIN!!!!

Credit: "I am Charlie not PEGIDA" by Kostas Koufogiorgos / http://www.koufogiorgos.de/110115_pegidafarbe.html

Credit: "Récupération" by Michel Cambon / http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/p...ists-take-on-pegida-fotostrecke-122796-2.html


Credit: "Récupération Fasciste" by Jean-Marc "Giemsi" Couchet / http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/p...ists-take-on-pegida-fotostrecke-122796-3.html

Credit: "We are not Nazis" by Marian Kamensky / http://www.cagle.com/2014/12/we-are-not-nazis/

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

The French prime minister Valls has already officially declare France's "war on terrorism" in response to Charlie Hebdo massacre. His comments have regrettably been compared to former President Bush's post-9/11 war on terrorism speech.

Instead of being in fear of the terrorists, Americans should have been afraid of what the government would do to its own people in terms of using the new "war" as a pretense to erode the freedom and liberties of its citizens.

It's a pivotal moment for France. Will it truly remain committed to defending liberté, égalité, and fraternité? Or will it chip away at those principles with its own version of the Patriot Act and forms of government surveillance that unapologetically target non-terrorists?

Allahu Hackbar!

by Mark Steyn
January 12, 2015

So, just as President Obama is giving a big speech on cyber-security, the jihackists of the Islamic State manage to http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/01/12/centcom-twitter-account-apparently-hacked-by-islamic-state-sympathizers/ (take over the Twitter and YouTube accounts of the Pentagon's Central Command). The juxtaposition would be too cheap and heavy-handed for any discerning playwright or novelist, but these days reality is less fussy: It's Mohammed's world, we just live in it.

Hacking into the Pentagon's social media accounts isn't the same as hacking into the Pentagon's classified databases. But as a thumb in the eye to the Great Satan it has a certain style.

And it's not irrelevant to the central question facing the still freeish world after the 17 dead in Paris last week.

There are those of us who think the issue is Islam - not all of Islam or at any rate not all Muslims, but a strain of Islam, and the one that's making all the running in the Muslim world today.

And there are those who say pay no attention to all the fellows howling "Allahu Akbar" and hooting about avenging the Prophet: There's no Islam to see here.

The latter group includes almost everyone who matters in the running of the western world. And so, in lieu of addressing the ideological challenge, they're offering us a security solution: oh, sure, occasionally someone will get through and there'll be some dead journalists or Jews or coffee-shop patrons or soldiers strolling through London streets, but they won't get through that often - because of our superior technology and intelligence gathering and surveillance techniques. As I wrote back in August:

I had the uneasy feeling, as with Cameron, that the upshot would be a world in which, in five or ten years' time, it will be more difficult and burdensome for law-abiding persons to fly from London to New York for a two-day business meeting or from Toronto to Athens for a week in the Greek islands. In other words, the political leadership of the western world will attempt to micro-manage the problem through the panopticon security state.​

Indeed, if you look at post-Paris policy posturing, that's all they're talking about:

At the invitation of Bernard Cazeneuve, Minister of the Interior of the French Republic, the ministers of the interior/ and or justice of Latvia, Rihards Kozlovskis, President Pro Tempore of the EU Council of Ministers, of Germany, Thomas de Maizière, of Austria, Johanna Mikl - Leitner, of Belgium, Jan Jambon, of Denmark, Mette Frederiksen, of Spain, Jorge Fernandez Diaz, of Italy, Angelino Alfano, of the Netherlands, Ivo Opstelten, of Poland, Theresa Piotrowska, and of the United Kingdom, Theresa May and of Sweden, Anders Ygeman, met on January 11 , 2015, in Paris and adopted the following statement in the presence of European Commissioner for Migration and Home Affairs Dimitris Avramopoulos, Attorney General of the United States Eric H. Holder, Jr., United States Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, Steven Blaney, Minister of Public Safety of Canada, and European Counter - Terrorism Coordinator Gilles de Kerchove.​

And what did all these grandees decide? Well, like the lads of the cyber-caliphate, they're all about the Internet - that's to say, "while safeguarding that it remains, in scrupulous observance of fundamental freedoms , a forum for free expression", they're going to lean on Internet providers "to create the conditions of a swift reporting of material that aims to incite hatred and terror and the condition of its removing".

Ah. So to honor the memory of all those cartoonists who died for free speech they're going to police free speech ever more rigorously. This is already a culture in which a Yorkshireman can be arrested for posting a video of him dumping a Koran in the toilet, and in which the useless totalitarian twerps of the Scottish Police openly threaten the citizenry that they're under constant surveillance. What's more likely under the new security regime? That they'll be cracking down on ISIS recruiters and firebreathing imams? Or just creating makework schemes for Constable McPlod to chastise the multiculturally insensitive?

And don't think this approach is confined http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/11/us-france-shooting-security-idUSKBN0KK0DR20150111:

U.S. President Barack Obama will invite allies to a Feb. 18 security summit in Washington to try and prevent violent extremism, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said on Sunday after meeting his European counterparts in Paris...

Cazeneuve said the Internet needs to remain a space for free expression, but that Europe should fight against abusive use of the web to spread hate speech, anti-Semitic messages and the recruiting vulnerable young people for violence.

"We need to work more closely with Internet companies to guarantee the reporting and if possible removal of all content that amounts to an apology of terrorism or calls for violence and hatred," he said.​

"Violent extremism", eh? No need to get more specific than that, is there?

If this were likely to work, maybe it would be enough. But, as the Islamic State has just demonstrated rather drolly, the security state isn't that secure. And not just the Chinese and the Russians but the Norks and the new caliphate are getting rather good at poking holes in it.

 

[flenser]

Oh, Kawilt. We can always count on you to bring paranoid nonsense from the lunatic fringe, but lets try to keep this thread based in reality, shall we?


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca

"While many of Globalresearch's articles discuss legitimate humanitarian or environmental concerns, the site has a strong undercurrent of reality warping throughout its pages, especially in relation to taking its news from sources such as Russia Today. Its view of science, the economy and geopolitics seems to be broadly conspiracist.

Whenever someone makes a remarkable claim and cites Globalresearch, they are almost certainly wrong

What it really is
Despite presenting itself as a source of scholarly analysis, Globalresearch mostly consists of polemics many of which accept (and use) conspiracy theories, pseudoscience and propaganda. The prevalent conspiracist strand relates to global power-elites (primarily governments and corporations) and their New World Order.[2] Specific featured conspiracy theories include those addressing 9/11,[3] vaccines,[4] genetic modification,[5] Zionism,[6][7] HAARP,[8] global warming,[9][10] Bosnian genocide denialism[11] chemtrails,[12] and David Kelly.[13]

Globalresearch contributors are happy to source information from anyone who seems vaguely aligned with their ideology; during the 2011 Libyan civil war the site was an apologist for Muammar al-Gaddafi,[14] reproducing his propaganda and painting him as a paragon of a modern leader. In the 2014 Ukrainian crisis the site is taking the standard "anti-globalisation" stance against the Western side and falling into the ranks of imperial Russian propaganda instead.

It's no surprise then that the site has long become a magnet for radicals, fringe figures and whacko elements from the left in general."​

RationalWiki wouldn't be my first choice for a site review, but thanks for the laugh. Here's a review by Metapedia, a site I trust about as much as your choice - in effect, not at all.

RationalWiki is a genetic-egalitarian race-denialist propaganda website that is run by Ontario resident Trent Toulouse. RationalWiki is a wiki founded by secular humanists in response to Conservapedia. They regard Richard Dawkins as their messiah. It is based on MediaWiki, like Metapedia. The wiki has around 4200 English pages middle of May 2010. The information is inaccurate and sparse. The wiki begs for donations. The site is extremely anti-Christian and anti-Conservative and promotes http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Sodomy and gun restriction. ...

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/RationalWiki

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

View attachment 19341

Credit: "I am Charlie not PEGIDA" by Kostas Koufogiorgos / http://www.koufogiorgos.de/110115_pegidafarbe.html
View attachment 19338
Credit: "Récupération" by Michel Cambon / http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/p...ists-take-on-pegida-fotostrecke-122796-2.html

View attachment 19339
Credit: "Récupération Fasciste" by Jean-Marc "Giemsi" Couchet / http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/p...ists-take-on-pegida-fotostrecke-122796-3.html
View attachment 19340
Credit: "We are not Nazis" by Marian Kamensky / http://www.cagle.com/2014/12/we-are-not-nazis/

January 9, 2015 2:39 PM
Islamophobia Is a Myth

Why do liberals fear the working class and ignore anti-Semitic murder? Because they are bigots.

By Brendan O'Neill

The British press has never seemed as out of touch as it is today. All our broadsheet papers are packed with pleas to the people of France, and other European populations, not to turn into Muslim-killing nutjobs in response to the Charlie Hebdo massacre. The Guardian frets over “Islamophobes seizing this atrocity to advance their hatred.” The Financial Times is in a spin about “Islamophobic extremists” using the massacre to “[challenge] the tolerance on which Europe has built its peace.” One British hack says we should all “fear the coming Islamophobic backlash.” And what actually happened in France as these dead-tree pieces about a possible Islamophobic backlash made their appearance? Jews were assaulted. And killed. “Don’t attack Muslims,” lectures the press as Jews are attacked.

Across Europe, among the right-thinking sections of society, among the political classes, the response to the massacre of the cartoonists and satirists has been the same: to panic about how Them, the native masses, especially the more right-wing sections of the French population, might respond to it. The blood on the floor of the Charlie Hebdo offices was still wet when brow-furrowed observers started saying: “Oh no, the Muslims! Will they be attacked?” It’s the same after every terrorist attack: from 9/11 to 7/7 in London to last year’s Sydney siege to Paris today: Liberals’ instant, almost Pavlovian response to Islamist terror attacks in the West is to worry about a violent uprising of the ill-educated against Muslims. The uprising never comes, but that doesn’t halt their fantasy fears. What’s it all about?

The unreal, unhinged nature of this elite preemption of mass Muslim-bashing has been thrown into sharp relief by the foul events in Paris over the past few days. The massacre of journalists by Islamists was followed today by a violent hostage-taking in a kosher shop in Port de Vincennes by a gunman reported to be part of the same small cell of Islamic extremists from which the Kouachi brothers, who shot up Charlie Hebdo, sprung. Why invade a kosher shop? Well, it’s very likely there will be Jews in there, and if there’s one thing Islamists love more than executing those who insult their prophet, it’s attacking Jews. The kosher-shop siege and hostage situation is now over, and while the information coming out of France is sketchy, Reuters says four of the hostages — who may well have been Jews — are dead. So the gulf between the fears of he multicultural elite and the reality on the ground in France is colossal. “Leave Muslims alone,” they plead as the news wires report that four kosher shoppers have been killed. Many European observers seem far more exercised about the possibility of Islamophobic violence than they are by the reality of anti-Semitic violence.

It’s not surprising that there is such a gaping chasm between liberals’ hand-wringing over a potential violent and sweeping Islamophobic backlash and what is actually happening in France and elsewhere. Because the idea of Islamophobia has always been informed more by the swirling fantasies and panics of the political and media elites than by any real, measurable levels of hate or violence against Muslims. Yes, some dud grenades were thrown into the courtyard of a mosque in the French city of Le Mans after the Charlie Hebdo massacre, though mercifully they didn’t explode and no one was around to be injured. That is a foul act and the person or people who did it should be found and punished. But fears about widespread anti-Muslim violence, about the spread of toxic Islamophobic hate through the streets and in workplaces, are unfounded, because their driving force is the anti-natives, anti-pleb prejudices of the elites rather than any hard evidence of extreme hostility to Muslims.

Liberals’ angst about violent anti-Muslim uprisings always proves to be empty. So after the 7/7 Tube and bus attacks in London, there were wide and wild warnings of a violent backlash against the Muslims of Britain. Journalists predicted bloodshed. National Health Service workers were encouraged to keep their eyes peeled — i.e., spy — for any signs of anti-Muslim agitation among their patients. But there was no spike in anti-Muslim crimes. According to Crown Prosecution Service crime figures for 2005–06, covering the months after 7/7, only 43 religiously aggravated crimes were prosecuted in that period, and only 18 of those crimes were against Muslims. “The fears of a [post-7/7] rise in offences appears to be unfounded,” the Director of Public Prosecutions later admitted.

After the Boston Marathon bombings there were loads of media panic about the “ignorance and prejudice [that arise] in the aftermath of a terrorist attack” and concern that Muslims in America would get it in the neck. But Muslims have not been assaulted en masse by stupid Americans in recent years, including in the wake of 9/11. According to http://www.shfwire.com/anti-islamic-hate-crime-rate-differs-greatly-among-states, in 2009 there were 107 anti-Muslim hate crimes; in 2010, there were 160. In a country of 330 million people, this is exceptionally low. After the Lindt café siege in Sydney at the end of last year, there was once again heated fear on the pages of the broadsheets about dumb Aussies going crazy and attacking brown people. Nothing happened. No mob emerged. Muslims were not attacked.

Islamophobia is a myth. Sure, some folks in Europe and elsewhere no doubt dislike Muslims, just as other losers hate the Irish or blacks or women. But the idea that there is a climate of Islamophobia, a culture of hot-headed, violent-minded hatred for Muslims that could be awoken and unleashed by the next terror attack, is an invention. Islamophobia is a code word for mainstream European elites’ fear of their own populations, of their native hordes, whom they imagine to be unenlightened, prejudiced, easily led by the tabloid media, and given to outbursts of spite and violence. The thing that keeps the Islamophobia panic alive is not actual violence against Muslims but the right-on politicos’ ill-founded yet deeply held view of ordinary Europeans, especially those of a working-class variety, as racist and stupid. This is the terrible irony of the Islamophobia panic: The fearers of anti-Muslim violence claim to be challenging prejudice but actually they reveal their own prejudices, their distrust of and disdain for those who come from the other side of the tracks, read different newspapers, hold different beliefs, live different lives. They accuse stupid white communities of viewing Muslims as an indistinguishable mob who threaten the fabric of European society, which is exactly what they think of stupid white communities.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/396098/islamophobia-myth-brendan-oneill

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

RationalWiki wouldn't be my first choice for a site review, but thanks for the laugh. Here's a review by Metapedia, a site I trust about as much as your choice - in effect, not at all.

RationalWiki is a genetic-egalitarian race-denialist propaganda website that is run by Ontario resident Trent Toulouse. RationalWiki is a wiki founded by secular humanists in response to Conservapedia. They regard Richard Dawkins as their messiah. It is based on MediaWiki, like Metapedia. The wiki has around 4200 English pages middle of May 2010. The information is inaccurate and sparse. The wiki begs for donations. The site is extremely anti-Christian and anti-Conservative and promotes http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Sodomy and gun restriction. ...

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/RationalWiki

Hit a nerve, did I? Regardless, RationalWiki doesn't have to be your first choice for site review. But, UNLIKE your Metapedia link, at least they cited evidence to support their case against Global Research. The only cite Metapedia provided was to some totally unrelated study on homosexuality in non-human species. LMFAO

But, if you don't like RationalWiki, how about the opinion of a leading national Canadian newspaper? From the National Post:

"The Centre for Research on Globalization is – how to put it delicately- a Canadian clubhouse for crackpots of the anti-war, 911-truth, anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist variety. The Centre would not normally be worth noticing except for a laugh. But, today is not a normal day.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/08/23/terry-glavin-ottawas-gaddafi-fans-find-their-world-crumbling/
​

If the National Post didn't do it for you, how about the Western Standard's take on Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research's founder:

"MICHAEL CHOSSUDOVSKY, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA
As overseer of the anti-U.S., anti-globalization website GlobalResearch.ca, Chossudovsky has manufactured a long list of eyebrow-raising accusations that often read more like wild-eyed conspiracy theories than serious political discourse: the U.S. had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks ("Of course they knew!"); "Washington's New World Order weapons have the ability to trigger climate change"; the U.S. knew in advance about the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, but kept it to themselves (apparently so they could ride to the rescue of devastated coastal regions); big banking orchestrates the collapse of national economies. Of course, all that talk of banking conspiracies can lead one into some bigoted territory. B'nai Brith Canada has complained to the University of Ottawa about anti-Semitic postings on Chossudovsky's site."

http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=1998&start=1

​

Now I don't know about you, but when I read about someone saying the US knew in advance about the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, I tend to think they have more than a few bats in the belfry.

However, if that still doesn't convince you, how about Global Research itself. There's no better way to learn about the lunatic fringe than hearing it straight from the horses mouth:

North Korea, a Land of Human Achievement, Love and Joy

North Korea Celebrates 60th Anniversary of Victory

http://www.globalresearch.ca/north-korea-a-land-of-human-achievement-love-and-joy/5344960
​

And with that insightful and astute headline, the defense rests. Normally I would quote from the article but I just can't, in good conscience, bring myself to reproduce the rantings of the mentally disturbed. Sorry.

​

 

[Millard]

Islamophobia is a myth.

Islamophobia exists in France and the threat of it increasing is real. Just because it is not presently manifested in the same way (hate crimes and terroristic acts) doesn't mean it is not a concern for the French.

Islamophobia and anti-Semitism both need to be addressed.

Of course, the response to the Charlie Hebdo-related terroristic events should first and foremost address the immediate threats (against free speech, against Jews, against secularism) in France.

Hate crimes aren't the only expression of prejudice. Few will deny that the rise of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic sentiments in the French population have helped fuel the rise of the National Front political party.

France is in turmoil. But secularism is still very important to the French. The next decade will be interesting.

 

[heady muscle]

All sources of news have an agenda. I hope no one is saying or basing anything on NBC or Foxnotnews or any of the rest of the Corporate Media!

NBC, which since it's beginning is/was owned by General Electric, whom is still the biggest name in the military industrial complex. Last I recall they were in a joint venture with Comcast and Vivendi (French multinational mass media company headquartered in Paris, France and which is connected to Lagardère Group). Pretty interesting stuff when you maneuver through the tangled web that has been weaved.

With Military holdings that GE has I think it is easy to see how they would bang the drums of war. Any type of "war".


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda-setting_theory

Noam Chomsky's take:
http://www.alternet.org/media/10-brilliant-quotes-noam-chomsky-how-media-really-operates-america

Each step the media presents to us is another step towards world wide fascism. And if we follow, we are the Lemmings that deserve our fate.

 

[kawilt]

Oh, Kawilt. We can always count on you to bring paranoid nonsense from the lunatic fringe, but lets try to keep this thread based in reality, shall we?


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca

"While many of Globalresearch's articles discuss legitimate humanitarian or environmental concerns, the site has a strong undercurrent of reality warping throughout its pages, especially in relation to taking its news from sources such as Russia Today. Its view of science, the economy and geopolitics seems to be broadly conspiracist.

Whenever someone makes a remarkable claim and cites Globalresearch, they are almost certainly wrong

What it really is
Despite presenting itself as a source of scholarly analysis, Globalresearch mostly consists of polemics many of which accept (and use) conspiracy theories, pseudoscience and propaganda. The prevalent conspiracist strand relates to global power-elites (primarily governments and corporations) and their New World Order.[2] Specific featured conspiracy theories include those addressing 9/11,[3] vaccines,[4] genetic modification,[5] Zionism,[6][7] HAARP,[8] global warming,[9][10] Bosnian genocide denialism[11] chemtrails,[12] and David Kelly.[13]

Globalresearch contributors are happy to source information from anyone who seems vaguely aligned with their ideology; during the 2011 Libyan civil war the site was an apologist for Muammar al-Gaddafi,[14] reproducing his propaganda and painting him as a paragon of a modern leader. In the 2014 Ukrainian crisis the site is taking the standard "anti-globalisation" stance against the Western side and falling into the ranks of imperial Russian propaganda instead.

It's no surprise then that the site has long become a magnet for radicals, fringe figures and whacko elements from the left in general."​

Good Morning CBS....There you go again. Attacking the origins of an article. Keep up with what's going on in the world, try and get a handle on history. Try not to put everything in a left or right box.
There's a lot of information out there from both sides and somewhere around the middle you might glimpse a bit of the realities of our world.

 

[heady muscle]

Thanks heady muscle,all of these have taken place in one form or another over the years.

Yes it has. Each "new" administration takes a step further to making this a reality.

 

[flenser]

Hit a nerve, did I? Regardless, RationalWiki doesn't have to be your first choice for site review. But, UNLIKE your Metapedia link, at least they cited evidence to support their case against Global Research. The only cite Metapedia provided was to some totally unrelated study on homosexuality in non-human species. LMFAO

But, if you don't like RationalWiki, how about the opinion of a leading national Canadian newspaper? From the National Post:

"The Centre for Research on Globalization is – how to put it delicately- a Canadian clubhouse for crackpots of the anti-war, 911-truth, anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist variety. The Centre would not normally be worth noticing except for a laugh. But, today is not a normal day.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/08/23/terry-glavin-ottawas-gaddafi-fans-find-their-world-crumbling/
​

If the National Post didn't do it for you, how about the Western Standard's take on Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research's founder:

"MICHAEL CHOSSUDOVSKY, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA
As overseer of the anti-U.S., anti-globalization website GlobalResearch.ca, Chossudovsky has manufactured a long list of eyebrow-raising accusations that often read more like wild-eyed conspiracy theories than serious political discourse: the U.S. had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks ("Of course they knew!"); "Washington's New World Order weapons have the ability to trigger climate change"; the U.S. knew in advance about the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, but kept it to themselves (apparently so they could ride to the rescue of devastated coastal regions); big banking orchestrates the collapse of national economies. Of course, all that talk of banking conspiracies can lead one into some bigoted territory. B'nai Brith Canada has complained to the University of Ottawa about anti-Semitic postings on Chossudovsky's site."

http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=1998&start=1

​

Now I don't know about you, but when I read about someone saying the US knew in advance about the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, I tend to think they have more than a few bats in the belfry.

However, if that still doesn't convince you, how about Global Research itself. There's no better way to learn about the lunatic fringe than hearing it straight from the horses mouth:

North Korea, a Land of Human Achievement, Love and Joy

North Korea Celebrates 60th Anniversary of Victory

http://www.globalresearch.ca/north-korea-a-land-of-human-achievement-love-and-joy/5344960
​

And with that insightful and astute headline, the defense rests. Normally I would quote from the article but I just can't, in good conscience, bring myself to reproduce the rantings of the mentally disturbed. Sorry.

​

Why not address the article if it offends you so much? TBH, if I ruled out articles based solely on my opinion of their sources, I would be skipping over much of what you post.

 

[flenser]

Opinion from a different kind of conservative..

A Triumph of Terrorism
By Patrick J. Buchanan

January 13, 2015

Western media are declaring the million-man march in Paris, where world leaders paraded down Boulevard Voltaire in solidarity with France, a victory over terrorism.

Isn’t it pretty to think so.

Unfortunately, the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, its military-style execution, the escape of the assassins, and their blazing end in a shootout Friday was a triumph of terrorism not seen since 9/11.

Unlike the Boston Marathon bombing where the Tsarnaevs did not know or care whom they maimed or killed, the attack on Charlie Hebdo by the Kouachi brothers was purposeful and targeted terrorism.

And like a flash of lightning in the dark, it exposed the moral contradictions and confusion of the West.

During the slaughter the Kouachis shouted “Allahu akbar,” said they had “avenged the Prophet,” and spoke of ties to al-Qaida.

And the first response of President Francois Hollande?

These terrorists “have nothing to do with the Muslim religion.”

This is political correctness of a rare order. Perhaps terminal.

Linking arms with Hollande in solidarity and unity Sunday was Bibi Netanyahu who declared, “I wish to tell to all French and European Jews — Israel is your home.” Colleagues urged French Jews to flee to Israel.

Marching on the other side of Hollande was Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas who seeks to have Netanyahu’s Israel indicted in the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Gaza. Solidarity!

In chanting “Je Suis Charlie,” the marchers showed support for a magazine French Muslims rightly believe is racist and anti-Islamic.

Yet, Marine Le Pen, leading in the polls for the French presidency, was blacklisted from marching for remarks about Muslim immigration that are benign compared to what Charlie Hebdo regularly publishes.

All weekend long, journalists called it an imperative for us all to defend the lewd and lurid blasphemies of the satirical magazine.

But as journalist Christopher Dickey points out, Muslims in the banlieues wonder why insulting the Prophet is a protected freedom in France, while denying the Holocaust can get you a prison term.

Hypocrisy is indeed the tribute that vice pays to virtue.

Moreover, all this chatter about freedom of speech and of the press misses the point. It was not the right to publish that provoked the slaughter, but the content of what was published.

When Aaron Burr challenged Alexander Hamilton to a duel, and killed him, he was not attacking the First Amendment freedom of the press, but rather Hamilton, for defamation of Burr’s character, which had helped to destroy Burr’s career.

What the commentators seem to be saying about the assault on Charlie Hebdo is that not only is what is spoken or published protected by the First Amendment, but those who print and publish vile things must never suffer violent consequences.

People who believe this is attainable are living in a dream world, and may not be long for this one.

Even as children you knew there were words you did not use about someone else’s girlfriend, mother, family, faith or race, if you did not want a thrashing.

That same day millions marched in France, Saudi Arabia was administering 50 lashes to blogger Raif Badawi convicted of insulting Saudi clergy, the first of 1,000 lashes over 20 weeks in addition to his 10-year jail sentence. Had Badawi been guilty of apostasy, he would have been executed.

Welcome to the new Middle East, same as the old Middle East.

And Islam and the Prophet were not the only targets of Charlie Hebdo. Catholicism was also. In one cartoon, Charlie Hebdo depicts the First and Second Persons of the Blessed Trinity in incestuous activity.

And we all supposed to march in solidarity with that?

A liberal secular West might find this a democratic duty. Not all will. When people are using the First Amendment to assault the somewhat older Second Commandment, “Though shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain,” they should not be surprised when devout followers of Abrahamic faiths take a pass.

These Islamic terrorists are sending us a message: In the post-Christian West, Christians may turn the other check at insults to their God and faith. We are not turn-the-other cheek people. Insult our faith, mock the Prophet, and we kill you.

An awakening and rising Islamic world — a more militant faith than Christianity or secularism — is saying to the West: We want you out of our part of the world, and we are coming to your part of the world, and you cannot stop us.

And Francois Hollande’s response? Show solidarity with Islam by ostracizing Marine Le Pen.

This is the true heir of Edouard Daladier of Munich fame.

The Kouachi brothers sent yet another message.

If you are a young Muslim willing to fight and die for Islam, do not waste your life as some suicide bomber in the wilds of Syria or Iraq. Do as we did; shock and awe your enemies right inside the belly of the beast.

 

[kawilt]

Opinion from a different kind of conservative..

A Triumph of Terrorism
By Patrick J. Buchanan

January 13, 2015

Western media are declaring the million-man march in Paris, where world leaders paraded down Boulevard Voltaire in solidarity with France, a victory over terrorism.

Isn’t it pretty to think so.

Unfortunately, the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, its military-style execution, the escape of the assassins, and their blazing end in a shootout Friday was a triumph of terrorism not seen since 9/11.

Unlike the Boston Marathon bombing where the Tsarnaevs did not know or care whom they maimed or killed, the attack on Charlie Hebdo by the Kouachi brothers was purposeful and targeted terrorism.

And like a flash of lightning in the dark, it exposed the moral contradictions and confusion of the West.

During the slaughter the Kouachis shouted “Allahu akbar,” said they had “avenged the Prophet,” and spoke of ties to al-Qaida.

And the first response of President Francois Hollande?

These terrorists “have nothing to do with the Muslim religion.”

This is political correctness of a rare order. Perhaps terminal.

Linking arms with Hollande in solidarity and unity Sunday was Bibi Netanyahu who declared, “I wish to tell to all French and European Jews — Israel is your home.” Colleagues urged French Jews to flee to Israel.

Marching on the other side of Hollande was Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas who seeks to have Netanyahu’s Israel indicted in the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Gaza. Solidarity!

In chanting “Je Suis Charlie,” the marchers showed support for a magazine French Muslims rightly believe is racist and anti-Islamic.

Yet, Marine Le Pen, leading in the polls for the French presidency, was blacklisted from marching for remarks about Muslim immigration that are benign compared to what Charlie Hebdo regularly publishes.

All weekend long, journalists called it an imperative for us all to defend the lewd and lurid blasphemies of the satirical magazine.

But as journalist Christopher Dickey points out, Muslims in the banlieues wonder why insulting the Prophet is a protected freedom in France, while denying the Holocaust can get you a prison term.

Hypocrisy is indeed the tribute that vice pays to virtue.

Moreover, all this chatter about freedom of speech and of the press misses the point. It was not the right to publish that provoked the slaughter, but the content of what was published.

When Aaron Burr challenged Alexander Hamilton to a duel, and killed him, he was not attacking the First Amendment freedom of the press, but rather Hamilton, for defamation of Burr’s character, which had helped to destroy Burr’s career.

What the commentators seem to be saying about the assault on Charlie Hebdo is that not only is what is spoken or published protected by the First Amendment, but those who print and publish vile things must never suffer violent consequences.

People who believe this is attainable are living in a dream world, and may not be long for this one.

Even as children you knew there were words you did not use about someone else’s girlfriend, mother, family, faith or race, if you did not want a thrashing.

That same day millions marched in France, Saudi Arabia was administering 50 lashes to blogger Raif Badawi convicted of insulting Saudi clergy, the first of 1,000 lashes over 20 weeks in addition to his 10-year jail sentence. Had Badawi been guilty of apostasy, he would have been executed.

Welcome to the new Middle East, same as the old Middle East.

And Islam and the Prophet were not the only targets of Charlie Hebdo. Catholicism was also. In one cartoon, Charlie Hebdo depicts the First and Second Persons of the Blessed Trinity in incestuous activity.

And we all supposed to march in solidarity with that?

A liberal secular West might find this a democratic duty. Not all will. When people are using the First Amendment to assault the somewhat older Second Commandment, “Though shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain,” they should not be surprised when devout followers of Abrahamic faiths take a pass.

These Islamic terrorists are sending us a message: In the post-Christian West, Christians may turn the other check at insults to their God and faith. We are not turn-the-other cheek people. Insult our faith, mock the Prophet, and we kill you.

An awakening and rising Islamic world — a more militant faith than Christianity or secularism — is saying to the West: We want you out of our part of the world, and we are coming to your part of the world, and you cannot stop us.

And Francois Hollande’s response? Show solidarity with Islam by ostracizing Marine Le Pen.

This is the true heir of Edouard Daladier of Munich fame.

The Kouachi brothers sent yet another message.

If you are a young Muslim willing to fight and die for Islam, do not waste your life as some suicide bomber in the wilds of Syria or Iraq. Do as we did; shock and awe your enemies right inside the belly of the beast.

I hadn't seen this. Thanks for posting it. The truth is a bitter pill for many.