Hara-Kiri Hebdo was a weekly satirical magazine began to publish in 1969. It is a lesser known fact that Hara-Kiri Hebdo was the forbearer of Charlie Hebdo, which started to publish following a permanent and life-long ban on Hara-Kiri Hebdo in 1970.
In November 1970, following the death of the President of France Charles de Gaulle in Colombey-les-Deux-Églises, the weekly Hara-Kiri Hebdo published the headline "Bal tragique à Colombey : 1 mort" (in English: "Tragic ball in Colombey: 1 death").
The choice of the heading denotes to a tragedy of the same month, a fire at a discothèque that had claimed 146 lives. The chosen heading was conceived as derogatory, a cheap attempt of downplaying the gravity of Charles de Gaulle's tragic death, by suggesting a comparison with a tragedy which had just earlier claimed many lives. The people and government of France took this editorial choice as a deliberate felony of lèse-majesté against the deceased President. As a result, the Hara-Kiri Hebdo was immediately and permanently banned. Charlie Hebdo was started immediately afterwards.
My question is, where was the freedom of press and free speech when Hara-Kiri Hebdo was permanently banned?
@Areesh @Akheilos @Bratva @Donatello @forcetrip @Gufi @HRK @Horus @Jango @Jungibaaz @MastanKhan @niaz @Rafael @RescueRanger @Secur @Slav Defence @TankMan @WebMaster
The following is amendment to the French Freedom of Press laws.
Quote
LAW No 90-615 to repress acts of racism, anti-semitism and xenophobia (1990)
MODIFICATIONS OF THE LAW OF JULY 29, 1881 ON THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS Art 8. - Article 24 of the
Law on the Freedom of the Press of 29 July 1881is supplemented by the following provisions: In the event of judgment for one of the facts envisaged by the preceding subparagraph, the court will be able moreover to order: Except when the responsibility for the author of the infringement is retained on the base for article 42 and the first subparagraph for article 43 for this law or the first three subparagraphs for article 93-3 for the law No 82-652 for July 29, 1982 on the audio-visual communication, the deprivation of the rights enumerated to the 2o and 3o of article 42 of the penal code for imprisonment of five years maximum;
Art 9. –
As an amendment to Article 24of the law of July 29, 1881 on the freedom of the press, article 24 (a) is as follows written: <<Art. 24 (a). -
those who have disputed the existence of one or more crimes against humanitysuch as they are defined by Article 6 of the statute of the international tribunal military annexed in the agreement of London of August 8, 1945 and which were a carried out either by the members of an organization declared criminal pursuant to Article 9 of the aforementioned statute, or by a person found guilty such crimes by a French or international jurisdiction
shall be punished by one month to one year's imprisonment or a fine.
Art 13. - It is inserted, after article 48-1 of the law of July 29, 1881 on the freedom of the press, article 48-2 thus written: <<Art. 48-2. - publication or publicly expressed opinion encouraging those to whom it is addressed to pass a favourable moral judgment on one or more crimes against humanity and tending to justify these crimes (including collaboration) or vindicate their perpetrators shall be punished by one to five years' imprisonment or a fine.
Unquote
The above was voted for and passed on July 13, 1990.
You can call it a bad law and challenge its validity in court; nevertheless it is a Law as passed by the French legislature, just as the Blasphemy laws & Hudood ordinance of Pakistan. If you live in France you have to abide by their laws. Making a new law is a lengthy process and one cannot force French Gov’t that they must make another law forbidding cartoons of religious personalities because a law against the denial of Holocaust was passed 20 years ago.
Everyone must remember that Charlie Hebdot never singled out Islam; the magazine makes fun of Christianity as well as other religions. Even if Charlie Hebdot was based in Pakistan, one would expect them to be arrested, tried under the Blasphemy Law and punished whatever the Court decided. Trouble is that our society is accustomed to being judge, jury & executioner without going thru due legal process, hence cold blooded killers such Mumtaz Qadri are considered hero’s.
Another fact is that many in France don’t care a lot for religion and thus give very little consideration to the religious sensitivities of others either. On the other hand human life is held in very high regard. In Pakistan human life has no value whatsoever, even if you are caught, rich can get away by paying blood money which would be considered most inhuman in other countries.
However this does not mean that Charlie Hebdot can insult our holy Prophet (PBUH) with impunity. Pope has correctly declared that if you swear at my mother, you should expect a box in retaliation. The question here is retaliation in what form and manner?
I support the current peaceful protests. I would even support calling back Pakistani Ambassador from France. But to go on a shooting spree because someone hurt your religious feelings? Certainly NOT.
It is not the question of double standards. It is a question of attitude. I am against forcing my views on others with the barrel of a gun. If you live in a different country, you must respect their laws no matter how abhorrent. If you don’t like their laws, get the hell out.
my foot as well!! 
