• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Daily Mail: France to ban pro-Palestine demos

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mac_Lane

Member
Not bullcrap at all. Paris' prefecture of police decided to prohibit the protests, due to the very likely of disruption of the public order.
 
I havent heard anything here so I guess its bullcrap
Nope, was in the press, it's just a busy newscycle so it got buried under other stuff.

They're not actually issuing a blanket ban on these rallies. They're not issuing authorizations to some (most?) of them after things got ugly last week in Paris. Basically, there's often a fringe of hardcore antisemitic assholes in these and last week, they were met by members of the Jewish Defense League, an asshole hardcore organization that for some reason isn't outlawed here. Things got out of hand and the government concluded everyone would be better off preventing both sides from demonstrating.

The end result is that they're effectively banning some of these demos for now. Which probably won't prevent shit.
 

Raist

Banned
Didn't some protesters deface a Paris synagogue recently? This probably has to do with that.

There were multiple incidents, including people starting shit near 2 synagogues.

And stuff like that:

4003325_000-arp392420x2erc.jpg


I have zero issue with the government banning that shit.
 
Just because you haven't heard it where you live does not mean a story isn't true.

I'm french. I meant as I was on 24h news channel for about an hour today at different times of the day, I found it surprising to not have heard of it.

I posted a link above with the story. Probably should check the news every once in a while before dismissing it as bullcrap.

It's bullcrap. Title says demos. As in every future one. Article mentions one particular. It happens all the time here. French loves to demonstrate for everything and nothing but you have to ask before. Sometimes you don't get the authorisation of the city hall to demonstrate. Nothing more. Not like a law or a specific series of bans.
 

diamount

Banned
There were multiple incidents, including people starting shit near 2 synagogues.

And stuff like that:

4003325_000-arp392420x2erc.jpg


I have zero issue with the government banning that shit.

That isn't what they are banning though, did you bother to read the article? Any demonstrations relating to criticising Israel or anything pro-palestine is banned.
 

Raist

Banned
I feel there's an anti-Arab/ anti-Islam vibe coming from there like with protest ban, headscarf ban in schools, and general statements from political officials in the past, like Islam is "creeping in" or something.

Banning a specific protest when the last one led to violent acts isn't exactly unreasonable.
Any religious signs are banned in schools, not just headscarfs.
As for the "general statements", well I guess we can just flag the USA as an anti-black state in general given the many statements from many political/influential figures about the current president.
 
I feel there's an anti-Arab/ anti-Islam vibe coming from there like with protest ban, headscarf ban in schools, and general statements from political officials in the past, like Islam is "creeping in" or something.
This in particular has a lot more to do with France being way too often at the top of the list of antisemitic incidents and trying to curb them a bit.
 

Linkhero1

Member
It's bullcrap. Title says demos. As in every future one. Article mentions one particular. It happens all the time here. French loves to demonstrate for everything and nothing but you have to ask before. Sometimes you don't get the authorisation of the city hall to demonstrate. Nothing more. Not like a law or a specific series of bans.

So the title of the thread isn't accurate...that doesn't mean it's bullcrap. Why does it matter if it's a series of bans or laws? You said that you "haven't heard anything" and dismissed it as bullcrap.

also if you bothered to actually read the article rather than cherrypick the OPs mistake you'd have noticed

Still, only pro-Palestine protests are banned. Counter-demonstrations by pro-Israel groups are not.

Seems problematic, no?
 
As for the "general statements", well I guess we can just flag the USA as an anti-black state in general given the many statements from many political/influential figures about the current president.

you act like that would be a mindbogglingly absurd statement instead of one with a reasonable amount of truth to it
 

Raist

Banned
That isn't what they are banning though, did you bother to read the article? Any demonstrations relating to criticising Israel or anything pro-palestine is banned.

I'm not gonna bother to read the bullshit coming out of the Daily Mail.
I'm informed enough. They are banning the particular demonstration planned for the 19th of July because of the shit that happened during the last one. That's it.
A pro-israel demonstration planned for this very same sunday has also been officially banned.
 

Linkhero1

Member
I'm not gonna bother to read the bullshit coming out of the Daily Mail.
I'm informed enough. They are banning the particular demonstration planned for the 19th of July because of the shit that happened during the last one. That's it.

Still, only pro-Palestine protests are banned. Counter-demonstrations by pro-Israel groups are not.

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/7/18/paris-palestine-protest.html

Here you go. Quit being such a sourpuss.
 
Banning a specific protest when the last one led to violent acts isn't exactly unreasonable.
Any religious signs are banned in schools, not just headscarfs.
As for the "general statements", well I guess we can just flag the USA as an anti-black state in general given the many statements from many political/influential figures about the current president.
I don't think that's fair since the pro-Israel demonstrations are still allowed. They should all be curbed if that is the case. I also don't agree with the banning of religious symbols in schools, people should be allowed to wear what they want provided it's not infringing on the rights of others.
 

Raist

Banned

Al Jazeera. Yeah.

Le Monde:

A Sarcelles, deux manifestations – une propalestinienne et l'autre pro-israélienne – prévues simultanément dimanche ont également été interdites.

In Sarcelles, two demonstrations - one pro-palestine, the other pro-israel - scheduled for Sunday have also been banned.



I don't think that's fair since the pro-Israel demonstrations are still allowed. They should all be curbed if that is the case. I also don't agree with the banning of religious symbols in schools, people should be allowed to wear what they want provided it's not infringing on the rights of others.

They're not, read above.
And you're now moving from "anti-arab/muslim" to something completely different. If you don't like the "no religion in schools" things, that's fine. But don't try and pass it as targeting one in particular.
 
I don't understand this. The people have a right to protest. That's my American 1st extremism amendment talking though I know this is in response to the antisemitic attacks but that to me would spur more police presence not an outright ban.

But with Europe's history towards free speech I don't think this is far out from the norm. They ban far-right movements, racists from parading around. They've also banded groups that incite riots and violent actions.

Considering the protests this past week, where their was an attempted lynching. And racist chants
Among the protesters were those who carried signs reading "Gaza is a concentration camp" and "Anti-Zionism," according to local reports, and some called out "Death to Jews."
It fits europes MO to ban the protest.

Again, I think the actions on Sunday show the need to have a better police force but it seems like the 'threat to public order' reason is what's driving France. Not an attempt to silence opposition to Israel
 

This article reads like a propagandist's blog. What a joke that people think this Qatari mouthpiece is good journalism.

They claim that their source came from an area described as a quote "ghetto." Who described it as that? Who cares? It fits their narrative of oppression.

Second, while the reason for this ban is because of the fact that synagogues and Jewish-owned stores were attacked, Al Jazeera makes sure to note that only "Jewish leaders said" these attacks happened. Their wording puts into doubt the veracity of verifiable events. But why verify? It's not like Al Jazeera is a news organization.

Third, the mention of the anti-Semitic violence that actually prompted this specific ban(the one that the article is ostensibly about) is actually mentioned after some complete non sequitur of banning halal food from cafeterias. The halal ban has nothing to do with this, except to build the narrative of the oppressed Muslim minority, while the anti-Semitic attacks actually deal with the protest ban in question.

Fourth, unlike the untrustworthy claims of "Jewish leaders", the "local media" (ostensibly more credible) have it on good authority that the JDL, which Al Jazeera makes sure to label a terrorist organization from a 13 year old report, also attacked protestors.

--

diamount said:
Zionist lobby is working it's global agenda quite nicely.

Where have I heard this before?
 

bishoptl

Banstick Emeritus
Early warning to everyone - keep it civil. I will be watching this thread and have no problem nuking accounts if shit gets out of hand. First and last time I bring this up.

Zionist lobby is working it's global agenda quite nicely.
Jesus Christ
 

Carcetti

Member
Right to protest for the either side is a right that any civilized Euro country should allow. Of course any violence or vandalism should be stopped but a protest ban is just shameful.
 
Something I noticed (and not trying to take a conspiracy angle) is that a lot of politicians and media are quiet about this whole thing. Yeah Hamas is sending rockets into Israel and they should be condemned for it, but Israel is doing just the same with more advanced technology (probably because of the alliance with the USA) so they're injuring/killing many more people. Why is one side seen as "evil" and the other as "good" in the media and in politics?
 

Linkhero1

Member
Al Jazeera. Yeah.

Le Monde:



In Sarcelles, two demonstrations - one pro-palestine, the other pro-israel - scheduled for Sunday have also been banned.

The link I provided was specifically regarding today's protest. I just read the entire Le Monde article and yeah they banned both protests on Sunday. Regardless, people from both sides should be allowed to protest. It's a shame that violence usually erupts from these things.
 

Raist

Banned
The link I provided was specifically regarding today's protest. I just read the entire Le Monde article and yeah they banned both protests on Sunday. Regardless, people from both sides should be allowed to protest. It's a shame that violence usually erupts from these things.

It was yes. For a reason. Al Jazeera isn't exactly the most reliable source on the topic. Nevermind the Daily Mail.
 

Khaz

Member
The link I provided was specifically regarding today's protest. I just read the entire Le Monde article and yeah they banned both protests on Sunday. Regardless, people from both sides should be allowed to protest. It's a shame that violence usually erupts from these things.

ergo, these protests should be banned to maintain order.

They'll be allowed to protest when they will show that they can have some restraint. They can protest as much as they want to as long as they don't burn my car or attack people or buildings just because they don't share their faith. That goes for both sides.
 

Linkhero1

Member
It was yes. For a reason. Al Jazeera isn't exactly the most reliable source on the topic. Nevermind the Daily Mail.

Eh. I only knew about the ban on today's protest since every article I read about the ban only mentioned it so it's not really just an AJ thing.

ergo, these protests should be banned to maintain order.

They'll be allowed to protest when they will show that they can have some restraint. They can protest as much as they want to as long as they don't burn my car or attack people or buildings just because they don't share their faith. That goes for both sides.

I don't think they should be banned indefinitely. They should probably be better organized with heavy law enforcement supervision.
 
First of all, demonstrations do not have to be authorized in France, they are free (you're mocking us enough that you should know better).

They can only be banned on a case-by-case basis and only when there is serious risk that they could lead to public disorder. It's basically a decision made by the goverment reprentative, subject to an emergency recourse before court which in this particular case has already been tried. Court has confirmed the ban.

Now the previous demonstration against Israel current military action has caused serious trouble (fights in front of a synagogue, 5 people were arrested and 1 was already convicted to 4 months in jail) although it is unclear what happened exactly . Initial reports that pro-palestinian attacked the synagogue may have been unwarranted and the involvement of the Jewish Defense League (basically extreme right-wing jewish thugs) has been confirmed.

Tension is high (as always in France when the middle east sparks up, remember that it has both the biggest Jewish community in Europe and one of the biggest, Arab/Muslim community as well) and there is legal ground to ban these two particular demonstrations. Other demonstrations will take place this week-end in many other places in France.

All in all, it's a difficult situation. I still think that it's a shame that this demonstration has been banned because a good deal of people want to express their view on the matter (or even their anger) and they should be entitled to it. And this is coming from someone more than slightly concerned about the alarming increase in antisemitic acts (from everyday insults and hateful graffitis to synagogues and cemeteries being attacked or desecrated to 8-year-old girls being chased and executed on their schoolground).

There are places today, in France, where wearing a yarmulke or a star of David is seen as a provocation if not an invitation to getting beat up. And I'm sorry to say, but there is always a fringe group in these anti-Israel demonstrations who demonstrate nothing but hatred for Jews thinly veiled under the awful "anti-zionism" banner. And very little effort is typically shown from the majority of demonstrators and organizers to set themselves apart from the very people who supposedly are just an extreme, violent and (very) vocal minority.

Anyway, the demonstration should probably have been maintained with the required police force to channel the possible disruptions.The risk is now that people will gather regardless and if push comes to shove with the police or counter-demonstrators, no good will come out of it for anyone. I can already see the comments about the government/media being controlled by the Jews.

This whole thing has just absolutely nothing to do with niqab/burqas being banned (not really enforced by the way), halal meat or the banning of ALL religious symbols in schools, which, thank god, allows kids to not haver their right of being taught peacefully and on equal footing infringed by religious considerations for a few hours a day thank you very much.


Jesus Christ

First zionist conspiracy right there. The mood hasn't been so good lately but this made me laugh, thank you.
 
Didn't some protesters deface a Paris synagogue recently? This probably has to do with that.

No they did not.

Debunked.

http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/synagogue-attributed-semitism.html

But a violent incident that took place in Paris on Sunday widely described as antisemitic, using this narrative as the background, was actually a street fight between pro-Palestinian demonstrators and the Jewish Defense League; one that appears to have been started by the extremist latter in support of Israel’s ongoing bombing campaign that has thus far claimed the lives of almost 200 Palestinians – 80% of them civilians.

That hasn’t stopped powerful anti-Palestinian voices in the U.S. from using Twitter to appropriate the incident for their cause. On the same day he declared there to be a causal relationship between the mass killing of Palestinians by the IDF and the existence of Jews around the world, former Iraq War salesman David Frum highlighted the alleged attack amid his stream of sabre-rattling consciousness. Former IDF Prison Guard and admitted beater of Palestinian detainees Jeffrey Goldberg characterized the violence as “Jews Trapped by Rioters in Paris Synagogue” and questioned whether or not the incident was cause for migration. Dan Gainor, a “nondenominational Chrsitian” and waterboy for a right-wing media watch dog called Media Research Center” declared, in a refreshingly honest fashion for a bigot, that “France shows what happens after lots of #Muslim immigration: Jewish synagogue attacked, besieged.” Avi Mayer, the social media guru for the Zionist NGO, the Jewish Agency of Israel, declared the incident to be an “anti-Semitic riot, which masqueraded as an anti-Israel rally.” Yair Rosenberg, a writer for Tablet Magazine and employee of the Israeli State Archives, posted a video of the incident, describing the clip as capturing “anti-Israel protesters beseiging [sic] it and rioting outside” (it shows pitched battles in the street, filmed from inside the synagogue):

Videos at link.

EDIT: Al Jazeera Arabic can be called a Qatari mouthpiece in some regards.

Al Jazeera English is one of the most well respected and revered news agencies worldwide. Theres a huge difference. Calling AJ english an untrusty source is just a straight up lie. It's top notch reporting, even if you don't agree with it.
 
EDIT: Al Jazeera Arabic can be called a Qatari mouthpiece in some regards.

Al Jazeera English is one of the most well respected and revered news agencies worldwide. Theres a huge difference. Calling AJ english an untrusty source is just a straight up lie. It's top notch reporting, even if you don't agree with it.

Al Jazeera English is owned by Qatar and has its own agenda. The fact that you agree with it doesn't make it less biased. I pointed out specific ways in which they crafted their own narrative around the story. Mentioning halal school lunches before pertinent facts to the story is shitty journalism. Its editorial POV may be most apparent on Israel, but it's there in all its international coverage.
 
Al Jazeera English is one of the most well respected and revered news agencies worldwide. Theres a huge difference. Calling AJ english an untrusty source is just a straight up lie. It's top notch reporting, even if you don't agree with it.

I don't have anything to say about AJ in general but this particular article is factually incorrect and terribly biased.
 
This ban is stupid. At most, the authorities could have ordered the protesters to protest far away from their best enemies.

If it's dumb, it's a politician.
 
They'll be allowed to protest when they will show that they can have some restraint.

How would they be able to demonstrate this if they're banned outright from protesting?

A number of the replies in this thread have seemed like reasonable solutions to minimize the risk of violence without resorting to a total (if temporary) ban.
 

Dead Man

Member
ergo, these protests should be banned to maintain order.

They'll be allowed to protest when they will show that they can have some restraint. They can protest as much as they want to as long as they don't burn my car or attack people or buildings just because they don't share their faith. That goes for both sides.

LOL, how do 'they' do that?
 
ergo, these protests should be banned to maintain order.

They'll be allowed to protest when they will show that they can have some restraint. They can protest as much as they want to as long as they don't burn my car or attack people or buildings just because they don't share their faith. That goes for both sides.

Tell us more about 'them'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom