Women's laughter is met with murder all over the world; why have some GC feminists, especially in the UK, but in this case, France, allied themselves with this particular cause of demonizing Islam and claiming it only has to do with free speech?

My concern, as I've said, is that some GC feminists stand to become unwitting (or witting) tools in the softening up of the public to support yet another war against an Islamic country.

An attack on Iran would be catastrophic, and it would be pretty fucking hypocritical if women who call themselves feminists were even a tiny bit responsible for the deaths of millions of women. And not just in Iran, because a conflict with Iran could lead to a much wider war.

But in terms of these GC feminists support of free speech (well, when it's used against Islam) France recently jailed a man, Hervé Ryssen, for posts on Facebook and Twitter, and a YouTube video, that were deemed "anti-semitic." Why should France treat someone who makes anti-Islamic statements, or media, differently? And where is the GC free speech brigade's outrage?

I am a free speech absolutist: I would not have punished Herve Ryssen nor Charlie Hebdo, but that's not what's happening in France. Some groups are protected and some are not.

And Charlie Hebdo is hypocritical - This is from the link in my other response. While I don't agree with the author in other parts of his commentary, he makes valid points about Charlie Hebdo's and others hypocrisy towards Islam and free speech in general.

Also, as I mentioned, the earlier Mohammed cartoon controversy (2005) was by a Danish paper called Jyllands-Posten, under the direction of a man named Fleming Rose, and was designed to inflame the Islamic world. Fleming Rose was tied to Neo-Conservatives.

I am not a Muslim BTW: I am not a fan of religion, except the good parts like "Love Thy Neighbor" - I just love facts, no matter where they lead me. And I hate war.

"...Charlie Hebdo sacked the veteran French cartoonist Maurice Sinet in 2008 for making an allegedly anti-Semitic remark? Were you not aware that Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that published caricatures of the Prophet in 2005, reportedly rejected cartoons mocking Christ because they would "provoke an outcry" and proudly declared it would "in no circumstances... publish Holocaust cartoons"?

Muslims, I guess, are expected to have thicker skins than their Christian and Jewish brethren. Context matters, too. You ask us to laugh at a cartoon of the Prophet while ignoring the vilification of Islam across the continent (have you visited Germany lately?) and the widespread discrimination against Muslims in education, employment and public life - especially in France. You ask Muslims to denounce a handful of extremists as an existential threat to free speech while turning a blind eye to the much bigger threat to it posed by our elected leaders.

Does it not bother you to see Barack Obama - who demanded that Yemen keep the anti-drone journalist Abdulelah Haider Shaye behind bars, after he was convicted on "terrorism-related charges" in a kangaroo court - jump on the free speech ban wagon? Weren't you sickened to see Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of a country that was responsible for the killing of seven journalists in Gaza in 2014, attend the "unity rally" in Paris? Bibi was joined by Angela Merkel, chancellor of a country where Holocaust denial is punishable by up to five years in prison, and David Cameron, who wants to ban non-violent "extremists" committed to the "overthrow of democracy" from appearing on television."

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/charlie-hebdo-free-speech_b_6462584.html