thailiketoo Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 It was not a fake photo opportunity. It was a real photo opportunity to demonstrate to the world of radical Islam that the civilized world was all against them minus Barrack Hussein Obama. Rubbish, it was designed to make the world think these people care by sending misleading images like this around the world. And if you want to know what true hypocrisy is, read this admirable young man's account: http://www.smh.com.au/world/daniel-wickhams-epic-twitter-attack-on-world-leaders-at-paris-march-20150113-12myjf.html The image was not photo shopped it was not changed. It was a clear message that the leaders of the free world are united against Muslim extremism except for Barrack Hussein Obama who chose not to show his support. The blog you mentioned is a college kid from London, ya right we should take every college kid from London seriously. Get real. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 It was not a fake photo opportunity. It was a real photo opportunity to demonstrate to the world of radical Islam that the civilized world was all against them minus Barrack Hussein Obama. Rubbish, it was designed to make the world think these people care by sending misleading images like this around the world. And if you want to know what true hypocrisy is, read this admirable young man's account: http://www.smh.com.au/world/daniel-wickhams-epic-twitter-attack-on-world-leaders-at-paris-march-20150113-12myjf.html The image was not photo shopped it was not changed. It was a clear message that the leaders of the free world are united against Muslim extremism except for Barrack Hussein Obama who chose not to show his support. The blog you mentioned is a college kid from London, ya right we should take every college kid from London seriously. Get real. Did you even read it? If so can you not see the hypocrisy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) And I notice some Jewish leader complaining to Twitter about #ilovekouachi hash tags. Yes, this is all about defending free speech, isn't it? *puke* Edited January 13, 2015 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulesMad Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Europe is not important for US.... They think that only US related 'business' is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailiketoo Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 The image was not photo shopped it was not changed. It was a clear message that the leaders of the free world are united against Muslim extremism except for Barrack Hussein Obama who chose not to show his support. The blog you mentioned is a college kid from London, ya right we should take every college kid from London seriously. Get real. Did you even read it? If so can you not see the hypocrisy? He is a kid and didn't look at the whole picture. I can also find hypocrisy in any large gathering. The leaders of the world made a statement. If you chose to be on the side of the Muslim extremists, so be it, but the rest of us except Barrack Hussein Obama, the kid and you, got the importance of the photo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailiketoo Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Europe is not important for US.... They think that only US related 'business' is important Maybe you have forgotten Normandy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) The image was not photo shopped it was not changed. It was a clear message that the leaders of the free world are united against Muslim extremism except for Barrack Hussein Obama who chose not to show his support. The blog you mentioned is a college kid from London, ya right we should take every college kid from London seriously. Get real. Did you even read it? If so can you not see the hypocrisy? He is a kid and didn't look at the whole picture. I can also find hypocrisy in any large gathering. The leaders of the world made a statement. If you chose to be on the side of the Muslim extremists, so be it, but the rest of us except Barrack Hussein Obama, the kid and you, got the importance of the photo. The whole picture as you put it is that there are numerous world leaders there standing up for Free Speech against muslim extremism when they are quite happy to limit Free Speech to protect their own ar$es. Of course you would love to turn this into a "Look, Obama is bad" thread, but frankly that's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. Edited January 13, 2015 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Europe is not important for US.... They think that only US related 'business' is important Maybe you have forgotten Normandy. Maybe Europe wasn't an economic threat then, not being a Union and all. Although your point is noted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) And I notice some Jewish leader complaining to Twitter about #ilovekouachi hash tags. Yes, this is all about defending free speech, isn't it? *puke* Interesting. Kouachi of course is the last name of the two dead terrorists who attacked the Charlie office. I think in your series of comments referencing Jews (or pseudo Jews as you put it) on multiple threads now that there is something you don't get. The protests aren't about stopping people from complaining of being offended by offensive speech. Of course making heroes of the Kouachi terrorists is offensive and generally something only supporters of Islamic Jihad would do. The Charlie publishers were never saying don't be offended or you don't the right to express protest at their speech. That's different than saying you can't be allowed to publish offensive speech or any kind of justifation to murder people publishing speech that offends you. Edited January 13, 2015 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Yes it is true some of the leaders in the parade were from countries very repressive of free speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailiketoo Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Did you even read it? If so can you not see the hypocrisy? He is a kid and didn't look at the whole picture. I can also find hypocrisy in any large gathering. The leaders of the world made a statement. If you chose to be on the side of the Muslim extremists, so be it, but the rest of us except Barrack Hussein Obama, the kid and you, got the importance of the photo. The whole picture as you put it is that there are numerous world leaders there standing up for Free Speech against muslim extremism when they are quite happy to limit Free Speech to protect their own ar$es. Of course you would love to turn this into a "Look, Obama is bad" thread, but frankly that's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. If free speech was the issue all of those folks would not have been there. Muslim extremist shot innocent people because they disagreed with them. Shooting you know AK-47's killing people..........The issue is you can't go around shooting innocent people in Paris. If one wanted to protest for free speech you might see a march in Bangkok but you didn't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailiketoo Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Yes it is true some of the leaders in the parade were from countries very repressive of free speech. At least the PM of Thailand and the President of the USA didn't go. For that I guess we should be thankful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) If he'd gone, his critics would have criticised him for hogging the limelight. The bloke can't win, except, thankfully, the elections that matter Should have sent Biden. That would have worked. He's not even much of a target. Can't, he is Obama's insurance against assassination. He should have sent Michelle; my wife does all the stuff I don't think is important enough to do. I know what you mean. Same thing in my house. I decide who needs to join the United Nations. She decides everything else. Edited January 13, 2015 by chuckd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) If free speech was the issue all of those folks would not have been there. Muslim extremist shot innocent people because they disagreed with them. Shooting you know AK-47's killing people..........The issue is you can't go around shooting innocent people in Paris. If one wanted to protest for free speech you might see a march in Bangkok but you didn't. If muslims killing innocent French people is the issue, why wasn't there a rally with all these bods after the last incident involving a muslim terrorist killing civilians? Maybe that's a rhetorical question. Edited January 13, 2015 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 And I notice some Jewish leader complaining to Twitter about #ilovekouachi hash tags. Yes, this is all about defending free speech, isn't it? *puke* Interesting. Kouachi of course is the last name of the two dead terrorists who attacked the Charlie office. Well I'm glad you worked that one out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinneil Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Obama go to Paris. No way , if he had gone he would have been one of many!! Focus would not be on him . That would never do. Leader of the free world HA!! thats a joke!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailiketoo Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 If free speech was the issue all of those folks would not have been there. Muslim extremist shot innocent people because they disagreed with them. Shooting you know AK-47's killing people..........The issue is you can't go around shooting innocent people in Paris. If one wanted to protest for free speech you might see a march in Bangkok but you didn't. If muslims killing innocent French people is the issue, why wasn't there a rally with all these bods after the last incident involving a muslim terrorist killing civilians? Maybe that's a rhetorical question. That's why Netanyahu was asked not to attend. The march was meant as an anti Muslim extremest protest not a pro Israel protest. Why not before? Location, location, location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 And I notice some Jewish leader complaining to Twitter about #ilovekouachi hash tags. Yes, this is all about defending free speech, isn't it? *puke* Interesting. Kouachi of course is the last name of the two dead terrorists who attacked the Charlie office. Well I'm glad you worked that one out. That was only the introduction to my comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 If free speech was the issue all of those folks would not have been there. Muslim extremist shot innocent people because they disagreed with them. Shooting you know AK-47's killing people..........The issue is you can't go around shooting innocent people in Paris. If one wanted to protest for free speech you might see a march in Bangkok but you didn't. If muslims killing innocent French people is the issue, why wasn't there a rally with all these bods after the last incident involving a muslim terrorist killing civilians? Maybe that's a rhetorical question. That's why Netanyahu was asked not to attend. The march was meant as an anti Muslim extremest protest not a pro Israel protest. Why not before? Location, location, location. And now we're straw clutching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thailiketoo Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) If free speech was the issue all of those folks would not have been there. Muslim extremist shot innocent people because they disagreed with them. Shooting you know AK-47's killing people..........The issue is you can't go around shooting innocent people in Paris. If one wanted to protest for free speech you might see a march in Bangkok but you didn't. If muslims killing innocent French people is the issue, why wasn't there a rally with all these bods after the last incident involving a muslim terrorist killing civilians? Maybe that's a rhetorical question. That's why Netanyahu was asked not to attend. The march was meant as an anti Muslim extremest protest not a pro Israel protest. Why not before? Location, location, location. And now we're straw clutching. Not at all. I am presenting unbiased facts. 1. The killing took place in Paris. 2. The march took place in Paris. 3. Netanyahu was asked not to come to Paris. 4. You think the entire thing is hypocritical (It doesn't take a weatherman to tell which way the wind is blowing). I sense you think the terrorists were justified am I correct in that assumption? Edited January 13, 2015 by thailiketoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) I think it's pretty complex why Hollande didn't want Netanyahu in Paris. While I can't read his mind, it is well known there have been a series of attacks on innocent French Jews by Islamic Jihadists. In the Islamic Jihadist's minds any Jew (regardless of any ACTUAL connection to Israel) is a representative of the state of Israel so it's a proxy way for them to "kill" Israel. Of course that's never justified even though reasoned criticism of Israeli government policies are justified (as to any nation). Netanyahu coming to such an event in the wake of the murders of the Jews at the Paris grocery might be seen to inflame and encourage the connection in the minds of the Islamic Jihadists of Jews and Israel. Israel of course being VERY UNPOPULAR in France and Europe in general. But the truth is these Islamic Jihadists are not only anti-Israel, they are also antisemitic anyway. France is in a crisis ... Muslims, Jews, and the majority who are neither. Netanyahu coming or not being a good thing can be argued both ways. Now if you wonder if it is really justified that French Jews feel threatened by French Muslims, check out this scene outside the Kosher grocery terrorist incident. These are young French Muslims mockingly celebrating what's happening: Edited January 13, 2015 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keemapoot Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 ^I think Netanyahu coming was clearly mostly grandstanding, and for show back home, though of course he had perfectly legitimate reasons too. I don't know what to think of Obama's not sending a high representative. I haven't quite worked that one out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 I sense you think the terrorists were justified am I correct in that assumption? Christ on a bike that's a bit of a stretch, isn't it? How on earth do you draw that absurd conclusion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Netanyahu coming or not being a good thing can be argued both ways. Netanyahu never misses an opportunity to milk sympathy for the Israelis. Although note the careful editing of the picture he posted on his Twitter feed. https://twitter.com/netanyahu/status/554342013126987776/photo/1 Edited January 13, 2015 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Netanyahu coming or not being a good thing can be argued both ways. Netanyahu never misses an opportunity to milk sympathy for the Israelis. http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b71f69e201b8d0bd7479970c-400wi Europe is trying very hard to de-legitimatize Israel. Any Israeli PM wouldn't be doing her job if she didn't do all she can to combat that toxic and irrational demonization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Netanyahu coming or not being a good thing can be argued both ways. Netanyahu never misses an opportunity to milk sympathy for the Israelis. http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b71f69e201b8d0bd7479970c-400wi Europe is trying very hard to de-legitimatize Israel. Any Israeli PM wouldn't be doing her job if she didn't do all she can to combat that toxic and irrational demonization. No-one is trying to "de-legitimatize" Israel. They are simply trying to "de-legitimatize" Israel's actions against the Palestinians. Although as UG points out, often this is at the expense of not paying enough heed to the actions of the Palestinians' own terrorist factions. Edited January 13, 2015 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 No-one is trying to "de-legitimatize" Israel? That's the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 No-one is trying to "de-legitimatize" Israel? That's the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Oh get real. Who would honestly give a toss about Israel if they weren't the focus of Arab (and by extension, Muslim) ire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) The way the Obama administration handles it's foreign affairs...defies logic...is insulting...and is causing former friends of the US to look elsewhere for commerce and security... Who can blame them? It makes perfect sense according to its own 'total reset' buzz phrase, make friends of your enemies and enemies of your friends. On that basis it's a partial success.Makes a refreshing change that the diplomatic f฿&k up is so large that 'what difference does it make?' will not suffice. Edited January 13, 2015 by Steely Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil B Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Op's we missed out on a photo opportunity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now