I have just read and sign an online petition: "Visit "the Consular", the Baba Merzoug to Algeria ."
Personally, I agree with this petition, and I believe that you can be, too.
Agree with the petition and disclosed-the from your contacts.
Ugly GUENDOUZ .
The French Republic is betraying its own principles in prohibiting the rallies against the anti-Islam film and the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad published in "Charlie Hebdo" ? The question arises after the ban by the Paris Prefect of police of planned demonstrations saturday place du Trocadero and before the great mosque in the capital.
Contacted, the press service of the prefecture of Paris was confined, Thursday, to confirm that the gatherings have been banned because of the "risk of public order disturbances". A decision which is the result of the caution of the Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault against the importation of "conflicts that do not concern the France".
"We are in a republic which has no intention to be intimidated by anyone around its values", has added Jean-Marc Ayrault, the same day of the publication by "Charlie Hebdo" caricatures of the prophet Muhammad.
This firmness is echoed by his minister of the Interior, Manuel Valls, after the abortive Islamist manifestation, last Saturday, in Paris. But, from the point at which the demonstrators against the "attacks on the honor of the prophet" pass through the legal process, this posture policy may be faced with french legal realities, which consider the freedom to manifest just as important as… the freedom of expression.
In terms of manifestations, the jurists insist on the principle of proportionality - restrict a fundamental freedom assumes that the prefect identifies concrete threats and proved of serious disturbances of public order. The threats who adjudicate somewhat with the illegal demonstration of last Saturday, or the police forces were easily dispersed and arrested 151 Islamists in close proximity to the American embassy.
"The total ban of a rally fixed, away from sensitive sites such as the American embassy or the premises of "Charlie Hebdo", appears little based. The responsibility of the prefect is not to ban the demonstration, but to send the staff needed to secure", stressed Nicolas Hervieu, researcher at the Center for Research and studies on the fundamental rights (CREDOF).
The call to protest outside the Grand Mosque of Paris, most famous for its steam room and its chichas that its Salafist, had been published on a Facebook page and relayed by the social media. According to Nicolas Hervieu, the fact that these movements are little structures increases the risk of public order disturbances, but does not justify in either such a drastic measure that the total prohibition of manifest.
This prohibition appears particularly motivated by the fear of an emulation of the violent protests that have shaken the Muslim world. A pervasive sense of fear strengthened by some articles in the press, to the image of the editorial published Wednesday by the deputy director of the drafting of the Figaro, Yves Thrã©ard, against the Islamist threat which would weigh on Paris:
"How many are they? They were, do people take care to specify, that 250, last Saturday on the Champs-elysées . But, if we are not careful, they will be thousand tomorrow. And much more the day after tomorrow ( …) By all means, the public authorities must prohibit the forthcoming events that want to organize the Salafist and condemn their instigators".
This description alarmisttone contrast withthe rather moderate observed on the social networks around the word of order "not to Key my prophet", which evokes more the anti-racist slogans of years 80 that the Vulgate Islamist. The shaft - the scarecrow salafiste - continues to hide the forest of people who want to demonstrate against islamophobia.
Two weight, two measures
In defending tooth and nail the freedom of expression of "Charlie Hebdo", while sending a end of non-receive the legal demands of manifestations pro-Islam, the government therefore open to charges of two weights and two measures.
"It is paradoxical, but it is quite possible to demonstrate against the freedom of expression or manifestation. As long as there is no serious disruption of public order, the Salafist have the absolute right to do it. The role of the State is not to give a sneak preview of the freedom of expression on the other", stressed Nicolas Hervieu.
Face to the political vicissitudes, the lawyer recalled that the person or organization who is notify the decree banning the event can always remove a appeal to the administrative tribunal of Paris. If the prefect was not clearly motivated its stopped with the concrete security considerations, the ban on demonstrations would then great chance to be canceled.
Since the case of the Danish caricatures of 2005, then relayed by Charlie Hebdo, The team of the satirical newspaper is regularly accused of targeting more islam rather than the other biblical monotheism. To allay this suspicion, Eric Mettout has shown his article with three drawings supposed to demonstrate the equal resentment anticlerical of Charlie Against the three religions.
Problem: the third image is not end of the archives of Hebd CharlieO. It comes from the reality of a cartoonist close to Dieudonne, nicknamed "Joe Lecorbeau".
In aimed the "Judeo-nazis", The cartoonist, which is defined as "Anti-Zionist", Seems to want to lampoon the Israeli government consisting of, among other factions warmongers, of the ultra-right religious. The expression of "Judeo-nazism" Not a result of addition of the fertile imagination of an ideologue European anti-semitic: this is a Israeli philosopher, mohel , Yeshayahu Shachit Leibowitz, who has theorised this concept to denounce the crimes of war -Including torture - committed by the regime of Tel Aviv.
In the wake of the publication of his article, Eric Mettout has visibly realized his error: the third cartoon has been replaced, without explanation, by a real drawing - dating back to the 70- of Charlie Hebdo, although it was then, without that the preciseThe Express, Of a totally different editorial team.
To reassure the reader about the pseudo-egalitarianism of Charlie Contrary to the religions, Eric Mettout was thought advisable to put an image - rather sexist, vulgar that"Anti-semitic" - To default to have found a drawing satirical to charge against the Jews or the fundamentalist extremist militants of the "Greater Israel".
Ironically, the process of removing the site an caricature zionist -posted initially To Charlie Hebdo - Set aside as soon as the speech of The Express In favor of freedom of expression. To feed the debate on the legitimate right to satire, Eric Mettout and Christophe Barbier would have been able to maintain this image, whatever the judgment on its relevance, to illustrate the diversity of the caricature to the French. It was forget a unwritten principle of the public debate hex: it is the subjects - such as Islam and the Muslim fundamentalism - which are conducive to the derision while others - such as the issue of State crimes Israeli - who remain genuinely "Untouchables".