Paris attacks: social and political consequences?

[Leo Maximus]

... Apartheid .... It is a serious state social discrimination based on skin color!

That's right, except that it has no name with us. And the discrimination begins with the patronym.

[Christophe]

If it has a name, it's called "positive discrimination" !!
(humor ... halfway ...)

[Leo Maximus]

If it has a name, it's called "positive discrimination" !!
(humor ... halfway ...)

What's the point ? To nothing...

It is another expression at the con of political marketing.

It's like in the automobile where we use anglicisms for things that we want to pass for innovations. We are very strong.

In the 80s, we could still act, today it is too late, we must endure.

[Obamot]

[possible socio-religious categorization withdrawn] ...It should calm down...

Did you calm down too?

Last edited by Christophe the 20 / 01 / 15, 15: 09; edited 1 times

[Christophe]

I don't have to calm down, I'm calm ...

Regarding your remark concerning the edition: you are certainly the member who publishes his messages a posteriori ...

How do you say: the hospital that does not care about charity?

[Christophe]

In the 80s, we could still act, today it is too late, we must endure.

Undergo what?

Yes, we left a situation to rot for 30-40 years ...

[Obamot]

I don't have to calm down, I'm calm ...

Regarding your remark concerning the edition: you are certainly the member who publishes his messages a posteriori ...

How do you say: the hospital that does not care about charity?

It is not so much the edict that is interesting as the content of the text that has been corrected!

In this case it was a wink in the form of a compliment, since you gave up directly incriminating a socio-thing layer (which had not asked that you mention it, nor that a "generality" more be done in this regard.)

Going back to Holland, maybe you will understand better from then on, that it is not because people supposedly behave as retarded (and sometimes criminals if so mentally ill) that we should not be all the more tolerant and do at least diligence in this regard, as long as we are aware of it: while this is obviously not the case on the sidewalk opposite!

So it is not the West (or at least Europe) to feel responsible for leading these movements towards reason, as long as reason has no longer taken over some of them! The rest is here:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/post282074.html#282074

It's up to us to let go of the ballast, insofar as we know that the others are unable to do so (which does not mean "to bend" but to find other intelligible means without sacrificing the essential!)

Finally I say that, under the assumption that it is the West which is "right", but nothing is less certain, it is on a case-by-case basis.

So which hospital are we talking about? Pyromaniac firefighter or the other?

[Christophe]

It is not so much the edict that is interesting as the content of the text that has been corrected!

In this case it was a wink in the form of a compliment, since you gave up directly incriminating a socio-thing layer (which had not asked that you mention it, nor that a "generality" more be done in this regard.)

It's crazy how you sniff this forum !!

I transferred the passage to the Koran burned by the American pastor condemned to death so as not to add fuel to the fire!

Because there are two weights and two measures in (in?) Religious tolerance there!

So can we burn Bibles without anyone reacting? I would love to know what Elephant thinks !!

And I edited mainly to add this link: http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/20 ... _3214.html

In short, it stinks of all that!

[Obamot]

Burning a sacred book to which many people hold is much more serious than what the cartoonists of "Charlie Hebdo" did (who nevertheless had the disproportionate sanction that they had in relation to the feelings of some, even if the disproportion was total and glaring). But the instrumentalization of that, while we do not even know if the attackers of "Charlie Hebdo" are indeed the same who were then liquidated Dammartin (we suppose). Just as we have accused Daesh as sponsors (we suppose so). In this whole file, the accusations officially rocketed, long before we produced the evidence (which we are still waiting for). And so on ... Fortunately the ICC will be able to poke its nose into these cases, with real investigations, because that's what stinks!

Burning such a collection cannot be excused for any prayer collection, whatever its obedience! I would even say more, without the alleged jihadists having been offended, that did not prevent them from doing away with everything that could be related to the Buddhist cult in Bamiyan where they even blew up the colossal Buddha in carved stone on the mountain.

It highlights the exact disproportionality of what I wanted to demonstrate above. Since some are able to let their prayer books burn without reacting (or have their symbols destroyed by bombs without further reaction), it shows that they are more mature than the others. It is therefore good that their degree of responsibility is relatively "higher", so it is up to them to feel responsible for others and to anticipate so as not to then have to suffer the consequences!

Honestly, is that what the French government and the press have done best ...?

The majority of English-language newspapers have spoken of "DEFIANCEFor the issue of "Charlie Hebdo" which has just been released. Aren't they right to have detected it this way ?! For my part I consider the adjective correct, it is even far below the joint irresponsibility of a government which defends "its press", against a background of editorial slant* indefensible!

* if this term still makes sense in this case ...! Lamentable mess.

[pedrodelavega]

The majority of English-language newspapers have spoken of "DEFIANCEFor the issue of "Charlie Hebdo" which has just been released. Aren't they right to have detected it this way ?! For my part I consider the adjective correct, it is even far below the joint irresponsibility of a government which defends "its press", against a background of editorial slant* indefensible!

* if this term still makes sense in this case ...! Lamentable mess.

Some caricatures of the different prophets, it's not the end of the world either ....