French face jail for insulting the flag From Charles Bremner in Paris
ANYONE who jeers at the Marseillaise or insults the Tricolour may be jailed or fined for �offending against the dignity of the Republic� under a new law that symbolises President Chirac�s promise to impose order in France.
Ve Vill Haff ORDER!!
quote:Police say that the law, which provides for fines of up to �6,000 and six months in jail, will be unenforceable.
Also included in the security law, drafted by Nicolas Sarkozy, the tough-minded Interior Minister, are fines and imprisonment for youths who intimidate by congregating in stairwells; for beggars, squatters, travellers who trespass and women deemed to be �passively soliciting� for prostitution. Weakly defined, this offence can apply to any woman who dresses provocatively, rights activists say.
Insulting anyone who serves the public, from firemen and bus conductors to teachers and housing estate caretakers, also becomes a punishable offence. In another measure, police will no longer be required to advise criminal suspects of their right to remain silent.
(emphasis mine)
All the French who are insulting will be put in jail? The streets will be empty! Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Mabye Chirac is learning to run his country more "efficiently" like his pal Saddam. Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
There must be some point here that I am missing. Is this more France bashing? How is this related in any way to the U.N. and the potential veto on the Iraq question?
I mean the French government can do whatever it wants to do, it is up to the French people to say no is it not?
And while I am not necessarily changing the debate, consider the many attempts by Republicans to pass an anti flag-burning amendment and the current move by the Supreme Court to revisit Miranda.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"How is this related in any way to the U.N. and the potential veto on the Iraq question?"
It isn't. You're the only one who's mentioned either of those things in this thread.
The simple point is that Jacques Chirac is a total loony.
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
Sure, I know that, but the idea is "France gets worst", which must in some way be connected to the whole veto thing because some of us are on an anti France thing because of it.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Could he be the antichrist/european that is in prophecies?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I'd think the Antichrist would be less kooky. Have you seen this gut speak? Hand motions like...well...Jerry Lewis springs to mind. (and might explain his popularity with the French masses)
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote: “The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.”
“Restoring legal protection to the American flag will not place us on a slippery slope to limit other freedoms,” said Hatch in introducing the resolution. “No other symbol of our bi-partisan national ideals has flown over the battlefields, cemeteries, football fields, and school yards of America. No other symbol has lifted the hearts of ordinary men and women seeking liberty around the world. No other symbol has been paid for with so much blood of our countrymen. The American people have paid for their flag, and it is our duty to let them protect it.
“This amendment offers Senators, from both sides of the aisle, the opportunity to stand united for the protection of the sacred symbol of our nation.”
I think I may be sick. At this and the frogs. I mean please, have none of these people heard of freedom of expression? You can't ban something just because you or the establishment disagree with it. Look at things like the BNP and the Communist party; they weren't and aren't banned. The US is not perfect, First!!!!
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Didn't say that it was. Just better.
After all... that amendment is one of many identical ones that have been introduced here, and they never pass. France passed theirs. And they're supposed to be the freer, more left-leaning bunch.
Posted by Cartmaniac (Member # 256) on :
"Didn't say that it was. Just better."
It's that kind of attitude that brought down the world trade center.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
No, that would be the "Islam is the one true religion" attitude. You'll notice that I'm not religious.
And quite frankly, we ARE better than every single Middle Eastern country, and much of the rest of the world, in every measurable way from our greater equality and civil rights to our lesser economic disparity.
Canada and Western Europe POSSIBLY excepted. We'll see which other of those countries passes bills like this before the US does.
On the other hand, I think these are entirely appropriate measures. After all, France has an important role in the current dialogue about America's imperialistic aggression. These law-and-order measures will maintain security so that the French people's attention may be fully devoted to presenting arguments that Bush's America is a repressive, fascist state. Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
quote:No, that would be the "Islam is the one true religion" attitude. You'll notice that I'm not religious.
No Rob.
It's an off-shoot of the same attitude that results in burned-out black churches, and blown up Federal buildings in Oklahoma. It's the attitude "we're better than they are, so we'll kill them."
It's all the same damn thing.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
quote:Originally posted by First of Two: Canada and Western Europe POSSIBLY excepted. We'll see which other of those countries passes bills like this before the US does.
Thats a rather arbitrary distinction. Even if you could devise some sort of arbitrary qualitative way of measuring civil rights, social equality, and economic equality. Why would Canada/Western Europe/US necessarily rank above...say Australia or Japan? More fundamentally, who's to say that those things necessarily make a nation "better"? I might love living in a nation where all the mountains are carved with funny catchphrases and the lamp-posts are coloured neon orange. The guy down the street might place a heavy emphasis on mandatory all-you-can-eat buffets at every major eatery. Granted, these are pretty silly examples, but the principle remains the same. How can you arbitrarily say that a nation is "better" than another when its such an abstract concept?
Not to mention the silliness of asserting that the US is better in "every measureable way." France has more nuclear power plants, Nepal has more mountains/land mass, the Vatican has more popes. Canada has more cultural diversity. Australia has fewer people with the name "George W. Bush." Clearly, you lack creativity in the things you choose to meaure Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Vatican has more popes.
...for now.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by First of Two: France passed theirs. And they're supposed to be the freer, more left-leaning bunch.
France is left-wing like I am a flying Ford Anglia.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Well, if America is used as your reference point (because, I mean, could you expect an American to use anywhere else?), then I suppose everyone's a flying Ford Anglia.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"France is left-wing like I am a flying Ford Anglia."
I loved your performance in that movie. Did you do your own stunts?
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)