Respect others by cutting off their heads
Oh does he.
That was 12. Let’s see the beginning.
But talking about a religion is not comparable to walking up to one person and picking a fight.
But never mind all that, let’s talk about women and why it’s necessary to go on treating them as inferiors.
No. Freedom for women was never limited to the right to vote in elections. That’s back of the cereal box history and it’s wrong.
Well all righty then! Men are stronger than women therefore men should dominate and persecute women. Powerful logic!
Dang. This started off being about Islam and tolerance of religious differences, but the guy seems to be pruriently obsessed with uppity women and…their naughty bits. WHAT IS BEHIND THAT STRING???
He says, showing utter disrespect for the values of others.
And then came the “right to kill millions of French people” tweet.
The death toll in the Algerian war was hard to pin down.
Historians, like Alistair Horne and Raymond Aron, state that the actual number of Algerian Muslim war dead was far greater than the official French estimates, but was fewer than the 1 million deaths claimed by the Algerian government after independence. Horne estimated Algerian casualties during the span of eight years to be around 700,000. Uncounted thousands of Muslim civilians lost their lives in French Army ratissages, bombing raids, or vigilante reprisals. The war uprooted more than 2 million Algerians, who were forced to relocate in French camps or to flee into the Algerian hinterland, where many thousands died of starvation, disease, and exposure.
It’s true that European and American colonizers have killed a lot of Muslims; it’s not true that that fact equates to a “right” to kill an equivalent number of non-Muslims. It’s even less true that cutting off the head of a history teacher is a way to redress the wrongs.
Would that statement be sufficient to end diplomatic relations with Malaysia, send all current Malaysians in France back home, and refuse further visas to France for Malaysians? It very much seems like encouragement of premeditated murder.
Probably too many French corporate interests getting products produced in Malaysia for that to be viable… Malaysia is after all one of the countries that replaced “Made in China” (other prominent ones being Vietnam and Indonesia)
“The right to freedom of expression does not include the right to insult people.”
“Muslims have the right to kill millions of French people.”
Is it just me, or are his values just a tad off-kilter?
Equating killing and being offended. Religion is nefarious at mincing logic.
Not really even equating. They seem to view it as a worse crime to do or say something to which they take offense. Killing is nothing in comparison.
Too many people have their priorities screwed up.
The imaginary violence of a rhetorical offense is much more significant to them than the real, physical violence they dole out. Reminds me of someone, can’t think who…
No. He. Wasn’t.
As in the Danish cartoons, which had been reprinted in an Egyptian newspaper with no outrage, the anger was whipped up by opportunistic fanatics. A parent launched false claims in social media to whip up a killing frenzy.
Yep.
One of the crucial facts about the Danish Motoons uproar, that interested parties keep leaving out, is that the group of mullahs who deliberately worked up the fake outrage INCLUDED A BOGUS EXAMPLE. It was the most outragey one of all, involving a guy wearing a pig mask…which in fact was nothing to do with Islam or cartoons but a photo lifted from an agricultural fair in France. I remember arguing until I was blue in the face with sanctimonious “liberals” intent on blaming the cartoonists.
Why not? It’s rude, especially if curse is undeserved, but why would it justify any violent response (let alone murder)? And further, the curse cited by example is a direct personal attack, but the precipitating for this killing was an insult to a supreme being who really should be mature enough to not take personal umbrage, or if umbrage must be taken, surely ought to be able to defend himself.
This, of course, is quite similar to Pope Frankie’s response to the Charlie Hebdo murders
and
Mahathir is now saying his remarks were taken out of context. What context?