Charlie Hebdo Insults Are Legal but a Politician is on Trial for Objecting to Overwhelming Muslim Immigration

If you are concerned about the cultural implications of Muslim immigration, the French government will prosecute you. On January 8 of this year our writers began posting about Charlie Hebdo and free speech. The reason for this was Islamic mass murder of a rather vile publication called Charlie Hebdo. Vile or not, they were killed for what they wrote and published and drew as cartoons. So the French public, Europe, and the Western world went on a giant collective rant of words and symbolic gestures Read more […]

Do Christians Count as much as Charlie Hebdo?

Do the leaders who condemned the killing of the Charlie Hebdo twelve care about the Christian twenty-one? In January, world leaders gathered in France under the banner “Je suis Charlie”—proclaiming solidarity with the twelve killed by Islamists at the offices of Charlie Hebdo, an irreverent French newspaper. Today I watched a video of twenty-one Coptic Christians, each being led along a beach by a black-clad jihadist, before being pushed to their knees so that the leader of the cowardly Read more […]

French Comedian Tells Joke; Gets Arrested

Who gets arrested and who doesn’t get arrested tells you France does not have free speech. So the reason, we were told, that Charlie Hebdo got to publish cartoons that mocked and offended religious believers, including Muslims, was because France has a tradition of free speech. So naturally, in response to the killings, the French government is working overtime to affirm free speech… …by arresting people for what they say. Here’s a headline from The Associated Press: “France Read more […]

Andrea Mitchell, Alleged Journalist, Despises Free Speech

Andrea Mitchell wants the French Ambassador to explain why it is legal to publish anti-Islamic satire. Andrea Mitchell, having been married for years to Alan Greenspan, going back to when he was the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, is an amazing embodiment of how establishment media is in bed with the government. And she happily demonstrates the problem. The Daily Caller reports, “Andrea Mitchell To French Ambassador: Why Are ‘Provocative’ Anti-Muslim Cartoons Permitted?” The host Read more […]

Islamic Terrorist Killings “Have Nothing to Do” with Islam?

The French president, Francois Hollande, declared that the Islamic terrorist killings are unrelated to “the Muslim Religion.” Can we really go any deeper into denial? Newser.com: “French Prez: Gunmen ‘Have Nothing to Do With Muslim Religion’” French President Francois Hollande gave a televised speech today urging his people to act with “vigilance and unity” following the Charlie Hebdo terror attacks, reports Euro News. The French “will not give in to fear and we are capable of Read more […]

Anti-Islamic Feeling in Europe is Rationality, not Racism!

There are obvious reasons for anti-Islamic feeling. So one of the interesting features of the Islamic killings in Paris, is the reaction of German Prime Minister Angela Merkel. She was in Britain recently, and the Daily Mail reported on her public response to the Charlie Hebdo attacks: Chancellor Merkel said: ‘What has happened in Paris today is indeed a barbarous attack against all of the values we share.  ‘All of us that live in Europe strongly condemn these attacks and our thoughts Read more […]

Bill Mahar: Hundreds of Millions of Muslims Approve Paris Killings

Why are the remarks of Bill Mahar even considered controversial? I actually wonder if “hundreds of millions” is too high a number. But it is definitely in the millions and even tens of millions. Maybe he is right. Mahar, being an atheist, insults all religions in the video. Being a liberal he also displays a suffocating self-righteousness that is at least as bad as displayed by the worst religious believer. But the bad words are bleeped out: Raw Story reports: The comedian Read more […]

Terrorists Win: Media Self-Censoring to Avoid Offense

Having seen publishers killed, the media is now caving into terrorist demands by self-censoring. The First Amendment promises that speech will not be restrained or abridged by the government, but when criminals threaten you then it is assumed that the government’s job is to protect you from harm and thus protect your freedom of speech from others. What this means is that, when someone’s speech is attacked the government has a choice: either vigorously protect the speaker/publisher from Read more […]