France Shoot-Out

[Gilrandir]

“suffered the loss of freedom just because he admired some person who is suspected/convicted of killing four jews in a shop.” I like the JUST. Well, to agree with murder is an offense. To promote murder is an offense. JUST killed 4 Jews: that is not THAT much (many), worth admiring no?

Brenus at his best - he can't even read what is written a line above his indignation. Did I say "just killed?" I said "just admired", underscoring that the only crime committed by the comedian was admiration of some unworthy person. Why, Putin admired Goebbels to the face of a bunch of jews and it didn't move you to any righteous anger.

Even you “suspected” is funny: Cold blood obscurantist Muslim extremist killed 4 Jews in a Casher Supermarket (oops, Rhyfelwyr didn’t notice probably, there is access to food in SUPERMARKETS for non-secularists) and a Police officer according to himself on a video on Youtube.

Until a court officially declares someone guilty one can't call him that. Has the court passed any verdict? No? Then he is still a suspect. Learn the rules of democracy.

And to anser to you remark, no racism is not an opinion, as stated in French Constitution: "France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It shall ensure the equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction of origin, race or religion".
So pretending that one race is superior to an other is against the Law.

I might of an opinion to kill you. But until I do it, or someone do it for me, it is an opinion. Now, if I kill you. it stop to be an opinion, as if someone do it following my call.

If I just express a racist opinion and get fired - is it lawful? I mean I didn't call anyone to hurt anyone.

When you glorify a racist obscurantist killer for what he did, when you incite in racial and religious violences.

In effect we see that Charlie Ebdo by doggedly continuing to insult religious sentiment of muslims incites violence against christians and the French all over the muslim world.
And here comes an interesting question of limits on the freedom of speech:
a publication (by its indiscreet policy and flagrant abuse of the freedom of speech) causes damage to the image and/or economy of the country it represents. Should the government of this country limit the publication's activity? For example, if after the growing exasperation and demands from angry mobs the government of, say, Pakistan decides to call off (or not to sign) some contracts with France which will result in loss of jobs in France, should the finacial loss be recovered from the sky-rocketing revenues of the said publication?