There are approximately 2 billion people on this planet who believe that depicting the image of their Prophet is an act of blaspheme and is an affront to his followers.
Those that cloak themselves with the "freedom of speech" blanket to purposefully assault (and nothing more) a groups religious beliefs knowing it will incite violence are abusing these rights and endanger innocent people for nothing more than personal gain.
The next edition of Charlie Hebdo, out on Wednesday with a million-copy print run, will “naturally” contain cartoons of Prophet Mohammed, along with jibes against politicians and religions across the board, said the stricken weekly’s lawyer.
Richard Malka was among the first to call for the magazine to continue functioning after nine of its contributors, including famed cartoonists Cabu and Wolinski and its publishing director, Charb, were gunned down last Wednesday by Chérif and Saïd Kouachi.
When asked whether that meant more cartoons of Mohammed, which have been a regular feature in the magazine until last Wednesday’s attack, he replied: “Naturally.”
“We will not give in otherwise all this won’t have meant anything,” he told France Info radio on Monday, which broadcast from the magazine’s heavily guarded temporary offices at Libération newspaper.
“Humour without self-deprecation isn’t humour. We mock ourselves, politicians, religions, it’s a state of mind you need to have.”
“The Charlie state of mind is the right to blaspheme,” he went on.
Referring to the “Je Suis Charlie” slogans in support of its slain cartoonists that have circled the globe, he said: “A Je Suis Charlie banner means you have the right to criticise my religion, because it’s not serious.”
“We have never criticised a Jew because he’s a Jew, a Muslim because he’s a Muslim or a Christian because he’s a Christian. But you can say anything you like, the worst horrors – and we do – about Christianity, Judaism and Islam, because behind the nice slogans, that’s the reality of Charlie Hebdo,” he said.
Asked whether the surviving Charlie editorial team were able to focus on their job, he said: “It’s complicated, because we have to manage the future, the funerals that will take place all this week, but it’s moving forward and will be completed this evening.”
“It’s an act of life, of survival,” he said.
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
THE 1% ACCUSES POPE OF PAUPERISM
There are those in the 1% community who are going on the offensive by accusing Francis of pauperism rather than acknowledging they chose to ignore the Gospel's teachings and confirming which ''master" they serve..
(NCR) Pope Francis strongly defends his repeated criticisms of the global market economy in a new interview released Sunday, rebutting those who accuse him of “pauperism” by saying he is only repeating Jesus’ message of caring for the poor.
“Jesus affirms that you cannot serve two masters, God and wealth,” Francis states in the interview, bluntly asking: “Is it pauperism?”
“Jesus tells us that it is the ‘protocol’ on the basis of which we will be judged, it is what we read in Chapter 25 of Matthew: I had hunger, I had thirst, I was in prison, I was sick, I was naked and you helped me: dressed me, visited me, you took care of me,” the pontiff continues.
“This is the touchstone,” he states, asking again: “Is it pauperism? No, it is the Gospel.”
(NCR) Pope Francis strongly defends his repeated criticisms of the global market economy in a new interview released Sunday, rebutting those who accuse him of “pauperism” by saying he is only repeating Jesus’ message of caring for the poor.
“Jesus affirms that you cannot serve two masters, God and wealth,” Francis states in the interview, bluntly asking: “Is it pauperism?”
“Jesus tells us that it is the ‘protocol’ on the basis of which we will be judged, it is what we read in Chapter 25 of Matthew: I had hunger, I had thirst, I was in prison, I was sick, I was naked and you helped me: dressed me, visited me, you took care of me,” the pontiff continues.
“This is the touchstone,” he states, asking again: “Is it pauperism? No, it is the Gospel.”
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
WAS PRESIDENT OBAMA CORRECT TO NOT MARCH WITH HYPOCRITES?
President Obama locking arms with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Russia, and a handful of other leaders of countries that stomp all over human rights and freedom of the press.
RWB condemns presence of “predators” in Paris march, calls for solidarity with “all Charlies” - Reporters Without Borders
On what grounds are representatives of regimes that are predators of press freedom coming to Paris to pay tribute to Charlie Hebdo, a publication that has always defended the most radical concept of freedom of expression?
Reporters Without Borders is appalled by the presence of leaders from countries where journalists and bloggers are systematically persecuted such as Egypt (which is ranked 159th out of 180 countries in RWB’s press freedom index), Russia (148th), Turkey (154th) and United Arab Emirates (118th).
“We must demonstrate our solidarity with Charlie Hebdo without forgetting all the world’s other Charlies,” Reporters Without Borders secretary-general Christophe Deloire said.
“It would be unacceptable if representatives of countries that silence journalists were to take advantage of the current outpouring of emotion to try to improve their international image and then continue their repressive policies when they return home. We must not let predators of press freedom spit on the graves of Charlie Hebdo.”
The authorities have announced the presence of Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Egyptian foreign minister Sameh Shoukry, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, Algerian foreign minister Ramtane Lamamra, UAE foreign minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Gabonese President Ali Bongo.
RWB condemns presence of “predators” in Paris march, calls for solidarity with “all Charlies” - Reporters Without Borders
On what grounds are representatives of regimes that are predators of press freedom coming to Paris to pay tribute to Charlie Hebdo, a publication that has always defended the most radical concept of freedom of expression?
Reporters Without Borders is appalled by the presence of leaders from countries where journalists and bloggers are systematically persecuted such as Egypt (which is ranked 159th out of 180 countries in RWB’s press freedom index), Russia (148th), Turkey (154th) and United Arab Emirates (118th).
“We must demonstrate our solidarity with Charlie Hebdo without forgetting all the world’s other Charlies,” Reporters Without Borders secretary-general Christophe Deloire said.
“It would be unacceptable if representatives of countries that silence journalists were to take advantage of the current outpouring of emotion to try to improve their international image and then continue their repressive policies when they return home. We must not let predators of press freedom spit on the graves of Charlie Hebdo.”
The authorities have announced the presence of Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Egyptian foreign minister Sameh Shoukry, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, Algerian foreign minister Ramtane Lamamra, UAE foreign minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Gabonese President Ali Bongo.
FROM THE HAVES TO THE SOON TO HAVES
Finally the Democrats (not Republicans) are fulfilling the promise to share the wealth held by the "haves" to the "soon to haves" (as Republicans put it) which will probably have to wait until 2016 to see it happen.
Senior Democrats, dissatisfied with the party’s tepid prescriptions for combating income inequality, are drafting an “action plan” that calls for a massive transfer of wealth from the super-rich and Wall Street traders to the heart of the middle class.
The centerpiece of the proposal, set to be unveiled Monday by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), is a “paycheck bonus credit” that would shave $2,000 a year off the tax bills of couples earning less than $200,000. Other provisions would nearly triple the tax credit for child care and reward people who save at least $500 a year.
The windfall — about $1.2 trillion over a decade — would come directly from the pockets of Wall Street “high rollers” through a new fee on financial transactions, and from the top 1 percent of earners, who would lose billions of dollars in lucrative tax breaks.
The plan also would use the tax code to prod employers to boost wages, which have been stagnant for four decades despite gains in productivity and profits.
“This is a plan to help tackle the challenge of our times,” Van Hollen said, previewing a Monday speech at the Center for American Progress. “We want a growing economy that works for all Americans, not just the wealthy few.”
Sunday, January 11, 2015
SAUDIS FLOG WHILE US FIDDLES
Where's the outrage? The economic sanctions? The closing of embassies?
Just like 9/11 when 7 Saudis attacked NYC there's barely a whimper heard from the US when the Saudis flaunt the so-called freedom of speech rights so heavily defended elsewhere by the US and Western Europe.
It's seems that crime's against humanity and freedom of speech are interpreted differently and applied selectively by those who claim to be champions of human rights and free speech.
Saudi Arabia has lashed a liberal blogger 50 times in public, despite widespread international outrage and calls for clemency from human right groups.
Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, said on twitter that blogger and activist, Raif Badawi, was lashed outside a mosque in the Red Sea coastal city of Jeddah on Friday.
Badawi is due to undergo 50 lashes every week after Friday prayers, which will continue for 20 weeks until his punishment is complete.
Amnesty International says Badawi, who started the "Free Saudi Liberals" website, was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes on charges related to accusations he insulted Islam on the online forum.
He was also ordered by Jeddah's Criminal Court to pay a fine of $266,000.
"It is horrifying to think that such a vicious and cruel punishment should be imposed on someone who is guilty of nothing more than daring to create a public forum for discussion and peacefully exercising the right to freedom of expression," Philip Luther, Amnesty's Middle East and North Africa Director, said.
"Saudi Arabian authorities must immediately halt all plans to carry out this brutal sentence," he said.
The United States had also appealed to Saudi Arabia to cancel the sentence.
State Department spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, said the US was "greatly concerned." She called the 1,000 lashes an "inhumane" response to someone exercising his right to freedom of expression and religion.
"The United States government calls on Saudi authorities to cancel this brutal punishment and to review Badawi's case and sentence," Psaki said.
Just like 9/11 when 7 Saudis attacked NYC there's barely a whimper heard from the US when the Saudis flaunt the so-called freedom of speech rights so heavily defended elsewhere by the US and Western Europe.
It's seems that crime's against humanity and freedom of speech are interpreted differently and applied selectively by those who claim to be champions of human rights and free speech.
Saudi Arabia has lashed a liberal blogger 50 times in public, despite widespread international outrage and calls for clemency from human right groups.
Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, said on twitter that blogger and activist, Raif Badawi, was lashed outside a mosque in the Red Sea coastal city of Jeddah on Friday.
Badawi is due to undergo 50 lashes every week after Friday prayers, which will continue for 20 weeks until his punishment is complete.
Amnesty International says Badawi, who started the "Free Saudi Liberals" website, was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes on charges related to accusations he insulted Islam on the online forum.
He was also ordered by Jeddah's Criminal Court to pay a fine of $266,000.
"It is horrifying to think that such a vicious and cruel punishment should be imposed on someone who is guilty of nothing more than daring to create a public forum for discussion and peacefully exercising the right to freedom of expression," Philip Luther, Amnesty's Middle East and North Africa Director, said.
"Saudi Arabian authorities must immediately halt all plans to carry out this brutal sentence," he said.
The United States had also appealed to Saudi Arabia to cancel the sentence.
State Department spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, said the US was "greatly concerned." She called the 1,000 lashes an "inhumane" response to someone exercising his right to freedom of expression and religion.
"The United States government calls on Saudi authorities to cancel this brutal punishment and to review Badawi's case and sentence," Psaki said.
FREE SPEECH IS ABSOLUTE!
Hold on there! Not so fast!
As it turns out, a quick peek into the history books tells a different story and has more to do with who the target(s) are.
Take, for example, a group who's speech offended most Europeans (and the US) back in the 40's;
Nazi Julius Streicher never pulled a trigger in the Second World War. He never ordered anyone to die. He was a soldier in the First World War, not the second. But Nuremberg judges found him guilty of crimes against humanity and saw fit to sentence him to death for what he had written during the war. American soldiers carried out his execution in 1946.
The largely forgotten execution of Streicher serves as a reminder that Western society also has set limits on what is deemed acceptable speech.
Wartime England heard regular broadcasts from American-born fascist William Joyce, who was raised in Ireland and England. The Tokyo Rose of Europe, Joyce emigrated to Germany in 1939 and broadcast radio messages urging Britain to surrender. He was found by British forces in March 1945 and returned to England for trial.
He was found guilty by a jury of high treason, and the penalty was death by hanging.
The United States has its own grim precedents, predictably during war. The 1918 Sedition Act led to the imprisonment of several anarchists, particularly women. But none was threatened with death.
In September 2011, the drone strike slaying of militant propagandist Samir Khan was explained as an opportune moment: The main target was terrorist suspect Anwar Awlaki, and Khan was nearby.
They were American citizens, but Khan, 25, wasn't suspected of planning attacks or shooting at soldiers. His crime was publishing Al Qaeda's Inspire, a digital magazine written in Khan's American vernacular, preaching the undoing of the U.S government.
These examples of speech was deemed offensive and punishable by death by approximately 500 million (give or take a million) inhabitants of Western countries; many of which claim to be proponents of "free speech." and make boisterous claims about defending it to the bitter end.
Now, let's compare this with speech that defames (and is considered blasphemy) by Approximately 23% of the world's population which is Muslim. Current estimates conclude that the number of Muslims in the world is around 1.6 billion.
How is that not more or less as serious of an offense (a crime against Muslims) and deserving of similar retributions?
As it turns out, a quick peek into the history books tells a different story and has more to do with who the target(s) are.
Take, for example, a group who's speech offended most Europeans (and the US) back in the 40's;
Nazi Julius Streicher never pulled a trigger in the Second World War. He never ordered anyone to die. He was a soldier in the First World War, not the second. But Nuremberg judges found him guilty of crimes against humanity and saw fit to sentence him to death for what he had written during the war. American soldiers carried out his execution in 1946.
The largely forgotten execution of Streicher serves as a reminder that Western society also has set limits on what is deemed acceptable speech.
Wartime England heard regular broadcasts from American-born fascist William Joyce, who was raised in Ireland and England. The Tokyo Rose of Europe, Joyce emigrated to Germany in 1939 and broadcast radio messages urging Britain to surrender. He was found by British forces in March 1945 and returned to England for trial.
He was found guilty by a jury of high treason, and the penalty was death by hanging.
The United States has its own grim precedents, predictably during war. The 1918 Sedition Act led to the imprisonment of several anarchists, particularly women. But none was threatened with death.
In September 2011, the drone strike slaying of militant propagandist Samir Khan was explained as an opportune moment: The main target was terrorist suspect Anwar Awlaki, and Khan was nearby.
They were American citizens, but Khan, 25, wasn't suspected of planning attacks or shooting at soldiers. His crime was publishing Al Qaeda's Inspire, a digital magazine written in Khan's American vernacular, preaching the undoing of the U.S government.
These examples of speech was deemed offensive and punishable by death by approximately 500 million (give or take a million) inhabitants of Western countries; many of which claim to be proponents of "free speech." and make boisterous claims about defending it to the bitter end.
Now, let's compare this with speech that defames (and is considered blasphemy) by Approximately 23% of the world's population which is Muslim. Current estimates conclude that the number of Muslims in the world is around 1.6 billion.
How is that not more or less as serious of an offense (a crime against Muslims) and deserving of similar retributions?
Friday, January 9, 2015
SLAVE LABOR RETURNING TO AMERICA
The trend is disturbing. People are working more and getting paid less. Where is all the money going? It's obviously not going down to those who are doing the work growing the economy, but rather flows upward to those who sit in Boardrooms scheming for ways to hoard more profits and enrich themselves at the expense of those who provide the labor. Income inequality is alive and well in the USA.
Jobs are up, but wages are down.
The economy added 252,000 jobs in December, the Labor Department reported Friday, down from November’s robust increase of 353,000 jobs. Unemployment was 5.6 percent, down from November’s 5.8 percent. But average hourly private-sector earnings were down 5 cents, compared to November’s increase of 6 cents.
Jobs are up, but wages are down.
The economy added 252,000 jobs in December, the Labor Department reported Friday, down from November’s robust increase of 353,000 jobs. Unemployment was 5.6 percent, down from November’s 5.8 percent. But average hourly private-sector earnings were down 5 cents, compared to November’s increase of 6 cents.
The picture for wages, both through 2014 and over the past decade and a half, remains dismal. Nominal average annual wages grew 2.2 percent in 2014, beating inflation projections by only 0.7 percent and leaving median income well below its level not only before the Great Recession began but also after the recession ended. In five-and-a-half years of economic recovery, the median income should have increased. Instead, it is lower.
Speaking at the Washington event, Sen. Elizabeth Warren said, “For tens of millions of working families who are the backbone of this country, this economy isn’t working. These families are working harder than ever, but they can’t get ahead.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)