Options de recherche (Page 519 sur 998)

Maniac c'est très bon. Ca ressemble à un mélange entre Gondry, les frères Cohen et Lynch. Y'a même du porn en VR.

BlacKkKlansman : 70's , adam driver est un flic feuj qui infiltre le kkk. son opération est supervisée par un flic noir qui se fait passer pour adam driver par téléphone lorsqu il cause aux boss du kkk.
le pitch est complétement con mais tiré d'une histoire vraie.
donc on suit les pérégrinations de gros débiles redneck racistes. à la fin ils veulent faire sauter la baraque d une activiste noire mais se font exploser à la place.
le parallèle est fait avec les evênements de charlotteville et l'avènement de truump.
les flics sont racistes , les noirs aussi blabla . L'amérique est finie à la pisse blabla.

Ce film est intéressant pour le reste du monde qui doutait encore que ce pays est merdique.
pour le spectateur US , je doute que ce film est un intérêt en fait. black live matter va trouver que c'est génial en omettant que les noirs veulent buter du flic blanc. les trumpistes n'iront pas voir le film mais twitteront que c'est un complot du lobby pancake ou négroide.

le film est bon et nous rappelle qu on vit dans un monde de merde et que rien n'est en train de changer bien au contraire. 7/10

The statements which the court found incriminating were the following:

English translation:

“I./ 1. One of the biggest problems we are facing today is that Muhammad is seen as the ideal man, the perfect human, the perfect Muslim. That means that the highest commandment for a male Muslim is to imitate Muhammad, to live his life. This does not happen according to our social standards and laws. Because he was a warlord, he had many women, to put it like this, and liked to do it with children. And according to our standards he was not a perfect human. We have huge problems with that today, that Muslims get into conflict with democracy and our value system ...

2. The most important of all Hadith collections recognised by all legal schools: The most important is the Sahih Al-Bukhari. If a Hadith was quoted after Bukhari, one can be sure that all Muslims will recognise it. And, unfortunately, in Al-Bukhari the thing with Aisha and child sex is written...

II./ I remember my sister, I have said this several times already, when [S.W.]made her famous statement in Graz, my sister called me and asked: “For God’s sake. Did you tell [S.W.]that?” To which I answered: “No, it wasn’t me, but you can look it up, it’s not really a secret.” And her: “You can’t say it like that!” And me: “A 56-year-old and a six-year-old? What do you call that? Give me an example? What do we call it, if it is not paedophilia?” Her: “Well, one has to paraphrase it, say it in a more diplomatic way.” My sister is symptomatic. We have heard that so many times. “Those were different times” – it wasn’t okay back then, and it’s not okay today. Full stop. And it is still happening today. One can never approve something like that. They all create their own reality, because the truth is so cruel ...”

The Regional Court found that the above statements essentially conveyed the message that Muhammad had had paedophilic tendencies. It stated that the applicant was referring to a marriage which Muhammad had concluded with Aisha, a six-year old, and consummated when she had been nine. The court found that by making the statements the applicant had suggested that Muhammad was not a worthy subject of worship. However, it also found that it could not be established that the applicant had intended to decry all Muslims. She was not suggesting that all Muslims were paedophiles, but was criticising the unreflecting imitation of a role model. According to the court, the common definition of paedophilia was a primary sexual interest in children who had not yet reached puberty. Because paedophilia was behaviour which was ostracised by society and outlawed, it was evident that the applicant’s statements were capable of causing indignation. The court concluded that the applicant had intended to wrongfully accuse Muhammad of having paedophilic tendencies. Even though criticising child marriages was justifiable, she had accused a subject of religious worship of having a primary sexual interest in children’s bodies, which she had deduced from his marriage with a child, disregarding the notion that the marriage had continued until the Prophet’s death, when Aisha had already turned eighteen and had therefore passed the age of puberty. In addition, the court found that because of the public nature of the seminars, which had not been limited to members of the Freedom Party, it was conceivable that at least some of the participants might have been disturbed by the statements.

it had to examine whether the comments at issue were merely provocative or had been intended as an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam. It concluded that the latter was the case as Muslims would find the applicant’s statements – “he liked to do it with children”, “the thing with Aisha and child sex” and “a 56-year-old and a six-year-old? What do you call that? Give me an example? What do we call it, if it is not paedophilia?” – wrong and offensive, even if Muhammad had married a six-year-old and had intercourse with her when she had been nine.