Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

idlewhile
Community Member

PROTESTERS around the West, horrified by the massacre in Paris, have held up pens and chanted “Je suis Charlie” — I am Charlie.

 

They lie. The Islamist terrorists are winning, and the coordinated attacks on the Charlie Hebdomagazine and kosher shop will be just one more success. One more step to our gutless surrender.

 

Al-Qaeda in Yemen didn’t attack Charlie Hebdo because we are all Charlie Hebdo.

 

The opposite. It sent in the brothers Cherif and Said Kouachi because Charlie Hebdo was almost alone.

Unlike most politicians, journalists, lawyers and other members of our ruling classes, this fearless magazine dared to mock Islam in the way the Left routinely mocks Christianity. Unlike much of our ruling class, it refused to sell out our freedom to speak.

Its greatest sin — to the Islamists — was to republish the infamous cartoons of Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten which mocked Mohammed, and then to publish even more of its own, including one showing the Muslim prophet naked.

Are we really all Charlie? No, no and shamefully no.

 

No Australian newspaper dared published those pictures, too, bar one which did so in error.

The Obama administration three years ago even attacked Charlie Hebdo for publishing the naked Mohammed cartoon, saying it was “deeply offensive”.

 

President Barack Obama even told the United Nations “the future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” and damned a YouTube clip “Innocence of Muslims” which did just that. The filmmaker was thrown in jail.

We are all Charlie?

 

In Australia, Charlie Hebdo would almost certainly be sued into silence, to the cheers of some of the very protesters now claiming to be its great defenders.

 

Victoria now has absurd religious vilification laws, thanks to Labor, that were first used to punish two Christian preachers who at a seminar quoted the Koran’s teaching on jihad and — complained the judge — made their audience laugh.

 

Australia also has oppressive racial vilification laws which Prime Minister Tony Abbott had promised to relax but last year decided to keep, saying changing them would become a “complication” in making Muslim Australians side with the rest of us against jihadists.

One more surrender, and did you note how most “serious” journalists brayed for this muzzle? Celebrated when two of my own articles were banned?

 

But our journalists haven’t really needed a muzzle. They have been only too eager to shut themselves up rather than call out the growing threat of jihadism, brought to us by insanely stupid programs of mass immigration from the Third World.

 

When Dutch political leader Geert Wilders toured Australia to warn against the danger Islamism posed to our physical safety and our freedom, he was treated as a pariah and the protesters who pushed and heckled his audience were handed the microphone instead.

When jihadists screaming “Allahu Akbar” shot dead US soldiers at Fort Hood or coffee shop patrons in Sydney, ABC and Fairfax journalists pretended they had no idea what ideology could have motivated such slaughter.

 

When Boko Haram jihadists screaming “Allahu Akbar” kidnapped nearly 300 Nigerian schoolgirls, forcing them to convert to Islam and selling them to be raped, Islamist apologist and terrorism lecturer Waleed Aly refused even to acknowledge on Channel 10 that Boko Haram actually had an Islamist agenda, describing it merely as a group of vigilantes.

 

 

An armed police officer in Paris.

An armed police officer in Paris.

 

And when SBS filmed the then Mufti of Australia, Sheik Hilaly, praising suicide bombers as heroes in the Lakemba mosque just days before the September 11 attacks, it refused to air the footage for fear we might get the “wrong idea”.

This will go on. Be sure of it. Your ruling classes will not easily admit to having made an error that cannot now be fixed. It will prefer oppression to freedom, if that brings at least the illusion of peace — and many may even think they are right.

Hear already the lies.

 

You are told Muslim groups condemn the killings as unIslamic. Yet the Koran and Hadith preach death to unbelievers who mock Islam, and tell of Mohammed killing poets, singing girls and others who made fun of him.

No greater authority than the Ayatollah Khomeini, the then spiritual ruler of Iran, ordered the killing of writer Salman Rushdie for making mock of Islam in his The Satanic Verses.

 

We are also told the pen is mightier than the sword, but tell that to the people in the Charlie Hebdo office who found their fistfuls of pens no match for two Kalashnikovs.

 

Tell that now to even the brave leaders of Jyllands-Posten, who, after years of jihadist plots against their staff have had enough, refusing now to republish cartoons from Charlie Hebdo for fear of yet more attacks.

“It shows that violence works,” it admitted.

Everywhere you will find other papers making the same call.

We are all Charlie?

Bull. Absolute self-serving rubbish. The sell-outs are everywhere and will grow stronger.

The West’s political leaders have already told Muslim leaders they agree that mocking Islam is a sin, and have even passed laws — in France, too — making it unlawful.

 

They have attacked the very few journalists and politicians who dared warn against the Islamist threat.

Some now back Muslim demands for a boycott of Israel or at least greater recognition for the terrorists who run large parts of Palestinian territory.

 

Anything for peace, even if it means 
submission.

And for all the protests this past week, submission is what you must expect.

 
Message 1 of 93
Latest reply
92 REPLIES 92

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.


@am*3 wrote:

Seems a common pattern, any C&P quotes from Bolt or Pickering, never have any links or indications who wrote them, when they are posted here.

 

Mind you, one only needs to read 1.5 sentences and can tell who wrote it.


understandable embarrassment.

Message 11 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

I didn't even read it, the first line was enough Woman LOL

Message 12 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

Well 1.5 sentences was maximumSmiley Very Happy

 

Someone asked in the other Paris thread about the school boy who was wanted by the police in regards to the terrorist attack. I read he is BIL to one of the terrorists but he was at school at the time of the terrorist attack and not connected with it.

 

Maybe they could deport us nb? oops... I got my Australian Citizenship Certificate legally, no probs there re getting deported.

Message 13 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

I wish I could claim to be the author of the following post, but sadly I can't. I have C&Ped it from a thread on the UK's Round Table, in answer to a member who posted the link at the foot of the page, re the Paris march, and asking posters to sign up.

 

Here is his response. I'm sure he speaks for millions of other people round the globe. I thought the post was truthful, erudite, and succinctly composed:

 

'I would in principle like to support this, but in all honesty I cannot sign up to the Avaaz statement "We stand united in support of the march for Fraternity, Equality and Liberty. We are not afraid, and we will not be divided."

 

I am afraid. Afraid that our crooked politicians have given away our Great British culture and, because only politically-correct views are allowed, I am not allowed to state my unhappiness at the destruction of our once-great country. I am afraid that parts of my country are unrecognisable as millions of foreigners have been encouraged to come here - and even to call themselves British - without bothering to speak English or to comply with our laws. I am afraid that in only one generation my capital (London) has become a foreign city. I am afraid that many areas of our towns have gangs of foreign men roaming, attacking each other and sometimes assaulting English people. I am afraid that most of our schools and universities teach gullible youngsters that all of this is 'normal' and must not be questioned. I am afraid that online mobs think they have a right not to feel offended, and have convinced some Police forces that it is more important to protect their sensibilities than to deal with real crimes. And I am afraid that, our security services tell us, there are thousands of people living here, pretending to be British but actually holding allegiance to foreign countries and cultures and hating us so much that they are plotting to murder us. Yes, I am afraid'.

 

 

 

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/march_with_paris_d/?bRiAxcb&v=51060

Message 14 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

 

In other words, I don't know what it says bit I disagree with whatever it says?

 

 

Message 15 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

If one is afraid, one has let the terrorists win.

 

Au contraire, icy... one certainly does know what follows the first few sentences.. and one disagrees with it. I don't post I disagree with views if I haven't read the whole post/article. The 1.5 sentence thing,  was about who the author is, not about the whole content of the post.

 

Bolt & Pickering have written posts/articles bagging out Tony Abbott in the last few months, I agreed with those.

Message 16 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

and here's an article about the statement by the family of the slain policeman

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/charlie-hebdo-policeman-murder-ahmed-merabet

 

 

Malek reminded France that the country faced a battle against extremism, not against its Muslim citizens. “I address myself now to all the racists, Islamophobes and antisemites. One must not confuse extremists with Muslims. Mad people have neither colour or religion,” he said.

Message 17 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

JK Rowling attacks Murdoch for tweet blaming all Muslims for Charlie Hebdo deaths

 

Peaceful Muslims are no more responsible for terror than I am for Murdoch, says Harry Potter author
 

JK Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books, has condemned and mocked the tweet from Rupert Murdoch which insisted that even peaceful Muslims must bear responsibilities for jihadi attacks.

 

“I was born Christian. If that makes Rupert Murdoch my responsibility, I’ll auto-excommunicate,” she tweeted on Sunday.

 

She also praised “the courage and compassionate actions” of Lassana Bathily, the Muslim employee of the kosher supermarket that was the target of the second siege in Paris, who hid Jewish customers from the gunman by leading them to a basement chiller room.

His actions, she wrote, “remind us of what ‘humanity’ ought to mean”.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jan/11/jk-rowling-condemns-murdoch-tweet-charlie-hebdo-harry-p...

.

Message 18 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-11/murdoch-tweet-sparks-angry-reaction-on-social-media/6011288

 

Murdoch tweet blaming all Muslims for France terror attacks sparks angry reaction on social media

Message 19 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

Australian comedian Adam Hills joined the chorus of scathing criticism with "Oh good, Rupert Murdoch has waded into the Charlie Hebdo debate. I was wondering what an outdated, bigoted, sociopath might make of it all".

 

Good one.

Message 20 of 93
Latest reply