Charlie Hebdo - merged

[Soulman]

Really? I can see exactly where Soulman is coming from:



and then later on in the same article...



Seems clear to me that Lowles is saying that the likes of Charlie Hebdo (whom he clearly calls "muslim-haters") are different sides of the same coin and that they're inviting a reaction.

Lets face it Buzzer, after threads which started over a year ago, and were rightly condemned about Saville, his name still had to be brought into this debate.
Deflection and "Yeah but what about that then, what about the Crusaders from centuries ago" .......and this is why the problem will never be faced head on.

 

[daveinprague]

...and you got the HNH picture from where?

 

[Soulman]

Didnt fully answer...where did you get that picture from? Yes, there was an atrocity today. Not entirely sure why you choose to use it as an attack on a group like HNH

The picture is on the link that i just put up. Try having a look.

 

[Buzzer]

Didnt fully answer...where did you get that picture from? Yes, there was an atrocity today. Not entirely sure why you choose to use it as an attack on a group like HNH

Maybe because previously, Nick Lowles inaccurately described CH as muslim-haters and rather offensively compared them to Jihadists and said that CH 'welcomed' the attacks only to offer his sincere condolences today.

 

[daveinprague]

Ive looked. I dont see the picture of Lowels saying they deserved it.
Im talking about the picture you posted on post #187

 

[Soulman]

Maybe because previously, Nick Lowles inaccurately described CH as muslim-haters and rather offensively compared them to Jihadists and said that CH 'welcomed' the attacks only to offer his sincere condolences today.

In short Knowles is a hypocrite.

 

[Buzzer]

Ive looked. I dont see the picture of Lowels saying they deserved it.

Oh for Christ's sake. Whoever has done that picture have used shorthand phrases. You're being deliberately thick now. Read the article or if you can't even manage that then look at my post where I've quoted the relevant bits by Lowles verbatim. It's precisely what Lowles says except he uses longer sentences.

 

[daveinprague]

....and im curious as to who the 'whoever' was...it was a simple question. Calm down.

 

[HawkTheSeagull]

And masses and masses of muslim rape gangs

Because no one else is involved in cases of rape are they ? You say masses, there has been a couple - again, i refer you to the 70s TV personalties and the Catholic Church - they have done that horrible stuff to kids as well.

Your Islamophobia is clear to see.

 

[Dandyman]

Really? I can see exactly where Soulman is coming from:



and then later on in the same article...



Seems clear to me that Lowles is saying that the likes of Charlie Hebdo (whom he clearly calls "muslim-haters") are different sides of the same coin and that they're inviting a reaction.

I think he is saying they welcome a reaction. I don't see anything where he says they deserve to be the victims of violence which is what the screen shot implies.

 

[Buzzer]

I think he is saying they welcome a reaction. I don't see anything where he says they deserve to be the victims of violence which is what the screen shot implies.

Oh, he DEFINITELY says they welcome a reaction. The article by Lowles implies they also deserve it from my reading of it. He clearly doesn't regard CH as a venerable satirical organ taking pot-shots at the Establishment. He calls them extremists, muslim-haters, and symbiotic with Jihadists.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

We watch as Muslims (so called) cut off heads off aid workers,journalist by sawing the neck through with a knife in the name of their god...and yet draw a cartoon of them and they hit back by murdering civilians...just who are the bad guys here. There are decent Muslims,these murderers using Allah as an excuse ought to be bought to justice as the crimminals they are.

 

[daveinprague]

Satirical journalists welcome reaction? No shit.

 

[Buzzer]

....and im curious as to who the 'whoever' was...it was a simple question. Calm down.

Ah, I get you. Because the picture has been photo-shopped, yeah? Yep, that was unnecessary. Still....Lowles made a bad judgement call on CH. A very bad judgement call.

 

[JCL666]

Does it really matter than someone two years ago wrote a blog post that was shit?

I'm in Paris. No one here gives a **** about a Nick Lowles blog post from 2012.

 

[Buzzer]

Satirical journalists welcome reaction? No shit.

You really don't understand the concept of political satire in a free society then. If the purpose was to invite violent and deadly revenge then there wouldn't be any satirical magazines. Lowles is equating CH with Jihadists, as conclusions go it's as offensive as it is stupid.

 

[Skylar]

mod edit: not in any way acceptable. Major infraction, leading to temporary ban.

 

[HawkTheSeagull]

French police are carrying out a "anti-terror operation" in Reims, Eastern France in relation to the attack.

It has also come out that the police officer executed was also in fact a Muslim, showing the attackers simply didnt care who they were or what their religion is either.

Heavy gunfire being reported with other reports the police have the 3 attackers surrounded.

Mod edit: I've deleted the text that your observation below refers to.

Where the bloody hell do we start on this......

 

[Skylar]

It's true. Community cohesion so Governments the turn a blind eye. Do the research and you'll know it to be true.

French police are carrying out a "anti-terror operation" in Reims, Eastern France in relation to the attack.

It has also come out that the police officer executed was also in fact a Muslim, showing the attackers simply didnt care who they were or what their religion is either.

Heavy gunfire being reported with other reports the police have the 3 attackers surrounded.



Where the bloody hell do we start on this......

 

[Skylar]

Mod edit: Also not acceptable. Another major infraction; which, when added to the others you have accrued from different mods, results in a permanent ban