Drowsy Emperor

Well one thing is for sure, the political climate in Europe regarding Islam is changing. Partly due to the economic crisis, partly due to how unbalanced and dysfunctional the ideology of multiculturalism always was. This may have just won Le Pen the next election for her. PEGIDA protests in Germany grow daily. Come the next election cycle, politicians will have no choice but to follow suit.

The point of publishing the cartoons now is as a way to protest against the violence that happened, a middle finger to those who thought that killing the cartoonists would "shut them up" - not to actually display the content of the cartoons for informational purposes (which are crap by standards of clever satire). In this case they explicitly gave their reasoning and that reasoning is hypocritical at best.

What horse****. He's making an exception on the basis that Islamic faith doesn't condone showing pictures of muhammad (as a form of idolatry). But when the story of the woman who bashed the satanic temple display in Florida government building the other day aired: ... pictures of said display (which is obviously intended to provoke and offend) were everywhere. So, when muslims might be offended, the policy is to respect the tenets of the religion (?), but when its christianity, its a news story to gorge on like any other and "free speech". Riiight.

Sure, the caricatures Hebdo drew during the NATO bombing of Serbia were beyond despicable, and I think the magazine is a piece of trash that lives on cheap provocation rather than intelligent humor (of which there is plenty in French comics). But that's besides the point. The point is that this is Paris and not Riyad. If someone doesn't like what the French do in France (unpleasant as it may be), maybe they shouldn't be there?

\what's so insulting about it. There were plenty of "Allah akbar" suicide bombers. It was clearly targeted at those sort of people, not religion as a whole.

Do you have an example of major American news outlets that post insulting Jesus caricatures? I've never seen one, it would be incredibly foolish given the fact the US is still predominantly Christian. It would alienate a large audience. I will criticise anyone that publishes insulting and degrading material about religion. I will certainly not buy such publications, and will not be surprised if they lose advertisers or go out of business. But I will always defend their right to publish such material. That is how freedom works. The ones I've seen are usually amusing and not insulting. But then, some of the caricatures of Muhammad (the original Danish ones) weren't insulting either, and there was no reason not to print them.

Sadly enough, Charlile Hebdo belonged to the despicable discourse I described above. Is pig nosed Jesus clever satire?

Major american media refuse to print the caricatures of Muhammad as an act of solidarity, saying that there's "no excuse" to insult tens of millions of muslims. Yet they feel free to insult millions of Christians with Jesus caricatures. *sigh* ****ing (pseudo)liberals. Its freedom of expression when they're trampling their own cultural heritage for giggles but censorship when the other guy happens not to turn the other cheek. I don't know who I despise more, but the Islamists are at least consistent in their lunacy.

"Even if everyone in the office was armed it wouldn't have helped them one bit." Nonsense. When was the last time two armed gunmen walked into a place like a gun club, military barracks, police office, or anywhere else where everyone there was armed, shot everyone there (~10 people) dead using only fairly standard handheld weaponry, and then got away uninjured while shooting random people on the getaway? Never happened? Right. And it never will. But hey, in your world an entire religion is the problem, rather than a handful of evil nutjobs. You saying 'Islam in France' is the problem is as legitimate as saying 'Hamburger Eaters' are the problem the next time a non-vegan blows a bunch of people away somewhere on earth. In Sierra Leone a band armed with machetes massacred a UN camp with armed soldiers. Anything is possible if you're prepared and the other side isn't. What's the point you're trying to make? These aren't barracks, this is a satirical magazine. They aren't likely to keep a rifle in their brush jar even if it was allowed. There was even an armed police guard for the editor and he was killed along with the others. No one can live in fear and permanent preparedness for an attack that may never come.. And yes, islam is obviously the problem. I don't see terrorists of other major world religions making headlines at all, let alone regularly.

Gun laws in France aren't relevant to this discussion. These people planned the attack very well and knew what they were doing. Even if everyone in the office was armed it wouldn't have helped them one bit. The problem here is Islam in France. Unlike the domestic left wing terrorism of the 20th century, this is a problem that's: a) not going to go away any time soon b) can only get worse The reason these things happen is that Europeans have become too soft and too sensitive to violence. A few years back when the magazine reprinted the caricatures of Muhammad (those Danish ones) many cultural institutions were closed due to fear of revenge attacks. Also the offices of this magazine were firebombed at one point. Why is the French government afraid of Muslims in France, in its own house so to speak? Those cartoonists showed more political courage than their entire government and now they're dead. French response is labeling the killers as criminals and avoiding the entire (and solely important) islamic element, vague statements about freedom and shuffling the thing off to the police to handle. But this isn't a police matter, apart from the procedural aspect. This is political. And, as usual, nothing is being done.

Born in Paris. When will Europeans learn?

There was no way for the pro-russian side to win ever again since the whole "revolution" was also a political purge of all pro-russian politicians. Some members of parliament were thrown in dumpsters, houses and party offices torched, people threatened and beaten. This was the second of the western sponsored revolutions in Ukraine and the Russians let the first one slide because they still had ground in Ukraine in the aftermath. This time, they were likely to lose everything.

That comic is so true

How dare you! They support Europe and DEMMMMMUCRACY! Whenever I hear that a movement supports democracy I look skyward to see if the bombs have started falling yet.

****ing tragedy is what it is, they have no idea why they were fighting a war that made them cripples for life. They may think they do, but time will show that there was nothing to win and everything to lose, as far as the well being of the people living in Ukraine is concerned.

The problem with having a gun is that few people are aware what a serious commitment owning one is if you ever intend to use it. You have to be disciplined, you have to make time to go to the range etc, you have to take precautions so that kids or even grown people don't find it and handle it lest they do something stupid. And you can only get careless once before something terrible happens. I think many people get them for the wrong reasons.

The title of the second video is "knife the Moscowites". I can make out "Ukraine for Ukrainians" Sad to see slavic nationalism targeted against Russians, when the Kievan rus i.e. today's Ukrainians are the historical cradle of Russia. Same people really. This is the process of creating yet another nation state out of thin air by homogenizing the population against the "enemy". Moscow should have acted against this nazi minority way before they flipped Yanukovich.

It would appear that this time the change from the routine was what did it. Her husband gave her the purse with the gun compartment. She was probably used to carrying it around in a holster. Switched it to the bag, let it slip out of her mind and tragedy ensued.

Oh I was just poking you to see how annoyed you are by the whole thing.

I actually do think its hard work because its disgusting. Sleeping with dozens of strangers per day, with many of them so obnoxious that they have to pay to get laid, don't tell me thats not hard. Thats probably harder than any other job out there. I think most of the prostitutes are really unhappy about what they're doing. Two more reasons not to be part of this. I was talking about hard in the sense that it demands education or self improvement or at least qualifies as a physically demanding job that contributes to something, like building a house or whatever. Some people do it as the only way to get out of poverty or a rough patch (and I view that as a societal failing) but I know more than a few that do it just because school was "too much work" and it was simply the path of least resistance to money. Thus whats hard for you, or most people, may come surprisingly easy to others. Scary thought isn't it?

Easily entertained huh?

Sorry, but if you don't do it, then please refrain from giving an opinion on it. You sound like those people who never played PnP but have opinion it's stupid, pointtles, yadda yadda yadda. And I think on this forum I can safely write that we hate those ***holes. Why refrain from giving an opinion on it? Its not nuclear science, you're paying a woman to have sex with you. You hardly need to try it out to form an opinion of it, especially if you're already familiar with how normal human interaction works As a general rule people should refrain from giving opinions on subject they have neither knowledge nor experience. I personally think this rule would make a world a much better place. Normal human interaction? Are you suggesting that women who work hard in sex industry and their customers are not normal? That is strange, because I always thought that the norm was a general population not a margin. It may surprise you to learn that hiring hookers or being one is not the usual past-time or occupation for the general population. "working hard in the sex industry" made me chuckle. Makes it almost sound legitimate, if working hard while lying down weren't such an amusing contradiction.

So what does she do to those things, incinerate them and lick the remaining powder?

Sorry, but if you don't do it, then please refrain from giving an opinion on it. You sound like those people who never played PnP but have opinion it's stupid, pointtles, yadda yadda yadda. And I think on this forum I can safely write that we hate those ***holes. Why refrain from giving an opinion on it? Its not nuclear science, you're paying a woman to have sex with you. You hardly need to try it out to form an opinion of it, especially if you're already familiar with how normal human interaction works

Either you're hiring the wrong hookers or you're doing it sober. If you are on the drunk scale of 1-10 with 1 being sober and 10 being hospitalized hookers are best enjoyed at a 6-7. You can still, perform, and don't give a damn if they like you or not. I was expressing how I feel about the whole thing, I've never had an actual inclination to hire a hooker. Why would I do it when there are so many available women everywhere? Incidentally, I don't drink.