Extremists open fire at Paris satirical newspaper, kill 12

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by deep

no attack on my freedom at all

You aren't a fan of freedom of expression?

on a lesser level the killers only followed the golden rule and the cartoonists did not

Please explain what you mean by this.



Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by DaveC

Please explain what you mean by this.

i think i'd rather he didn't

[BoMac]

Originally Posted by mama cass

No, they've just been identified and possibly located...

Liberation was the first to report the arrests, but have since backtracked on that.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by BoMac

Liberation was the first to report the arrests, but have since backtracked on that.

[deep]

Originally Posted by DaveC

You aren't a fan of freedom of expression?

drawing those kind of cartoons is like yelling FIRE in a crowded theater
it contributes to the harm that follows, if the people in the theater had not reacted that way no one would have been trampled.

Please explain what you mean by this.

what is the golden rule?
One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself. something like that?

these killers are true believers that want anyone killed that blasphemes The Prophet. If any member of their family or if they themselves ever did that they 100% believe they should be killed. They treat others as they would want others to threat them. They also do not disrespect other religions and expect others to do the same.

The cartoonists did not follow the Golden Rule.

They knew their actions would harm and injure others is that how they wanted to be treated?

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by deep

drawing those kind of cartoons is like yelling FIRE in a crowded theater
it contributes to the harm that follows, if the people in the theater had not reacted that way no one would have been trampled.



what is the golden rule?
One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself. something like that?

these killers are true believers that want anyone killed that blasphemes The Prophet. If any member of their family or if they themselves ever did that they 100% believe they should be killed. They treat others as they would want others to threat them. They also do not disrespect other religions and expect others to do the same.

The cartoonists did not follow the Golden Rule.

They knew their actions would harm and injure others is that how they wanted to be treated?

in which country does that law apply? France is a secular country and holds freedom of expression dear (which includes the right to ridicule and be irreverent) and, above all, does not abide by the laws of Islam... if you went down THAT slippery slope, where would you draw the line?

and L.O.L. at your "They also do not disrespect other religions" comment

how about Salman Rushdie? Did he not follow your Golden Rule?

utter bollox, sorry Deep

[deep]

Originally Posted by mama cass

deep, Charlie Hebdo satirizes everything and everyone, all politicians, all religions, but normally no-one else attempts to kill anyone over it

The first thing I wrote is that I condemn the killers.

I am not a fan of any religion. There are a lot more serious problems with Islam in some countries than being able to publish highly offensive cartoons.

Defending these cartoons works against furthering more important things like education for girls, and advancing women's rights.

[deep]

Originally Posted by mama cass

in which country does that law apply? France is a secular country and holds freedom of expression dear (which includes the right to ridicule and be irreverent) and, above all, does not abide by the laws of Islam... if you went down THAT slippery slope, where would you draw the line?

I am not saying it should be outlawed, there are lots of things that are allowed but rarely done

why print demeaning images that offend people just because you can?

[mama cass]

you're talking about a radical minority deep...

Heads of the Muslim councils in France have strongly condemned the attack (as have many Islamic states) and an Imam in France has even gone so far as to say that the killers have not avenged the prophet Mohammed (which the attackers were claiming to do) but rather the "prophet Satan"

This is as much an attack on the Muslim communities who are living peacefully here, not just on the press...

[PhilsFan]

An absolute tragedy and a disgrace. Deeply saddening and troubling. Just getting a chance to read all about this now and it's just awful.

We should note that it's hard to talk about a story like this without addressing the rampant Islamophobia in France, and we need to remember that satire can still be racist. Freedom of speech is extremely important. But there's a responsibility we need to make sure we have when employing satire, and from what I've read Charlie Hebdo may have shirked that responsibility. Am I saying they deserved any of this? Hell fucking no. But in describing this as a tragedy, it's probably important not to jump "This is a tragedy that never should have happened" to "This is a tragedy that never should have happened, and I fully support Charlie Hebdo because they satirized everyone."

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

An absolute tragedy and a disgrace. Deeply saddening and troubling. Just getting a chance to read all about this now and it's just awful.

We should note that it's hard to talk about a story like this without addressing the rampant Islamophobia in France, and we need to remember that satire can still be racist. Freedom of speech is extremely important. But there's a responsibility we need to make sure we have when employing satire, and from what I've read Charles Hebdo may have shirked that responsibility. Am I saying they deserved any of this? Hell fucking no. But in describing this as a tragedy, it's probably important not to jump "This is a tragedy that never should have happened" to "This is a tragedy that never should have happened, and I fully support Charles Hebdo because they satirized everyone."

Charlie Hebdo was firebombed in 2011 due to publishing cartoons portraying Mohammed, the sadly now late Stephane Charbonnier (editor and cartoonist "Charb") had been living under police protection for years due to the threats and he was on the Al Quaeda wanted dead or alive list... sure they pushed the boundaries of satire, but they were standing up to bullies, and they refused to be intimidated as a matter of principle... humour is a precious freedom - you can't have bullies dictating what you can or cannot laugh at... religion can be incredibly ridiculous, and Charlie Hebdo was not afraid to put the spotlight on this (and every other issue known to humankind LOL)... otherwise what? will we just end up living in fear? pulling films from movie theaters??

and i'm not sure i would say "rampant Islamophobia", not among non-FN supporters for sure, we're not quite there yet, thankfully, i hope!!

[mama cass]

Simon Jenkins says it better than I can...

Charlie Hebdo: Now is the time to uphold freedoms and not give in to fear

Charlie Hebdo: Now is the time to uphold freedoms, not give in to fear | Simon Jenkins | Comment is free | The Guardian

[anitram]

Originally Posted by deep

Defending these cartoons works against furthering more important things like education for girls, and advancing women's rights.

Probably a discussion for another day.

But in principle I agree. When Bill Maher calls out progressives for their massive failings to speak out against the horrors in Muslim countries, he's right.

[Hewson]

Originally Posted by deep

what is the golden rule?
One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself. something like that?

these killers are true believers that want anyone killed that blasphemes The Prophet. If any member of their family or if they themselves ever did that they 100% believe they should be killed. They treat others as they would want others to threat them. They also do not disrespect other religions and expect others to do the same.

The cartoonists did not follow the Golden Rule.

They knew their actions would harm and injure others is that how they wanted to be treated?

Do you type this crap strictly to cause a stir?

[bono_212]

Yes.

[Vlad n U 2]

I was actually quite surprised to read that Charlie Hedbo is/was a leftist paper.

Originally Posted by anitram

But in principle I agree. When Bill Maher calls out progressives for their massive failings to speak out against the horrors in Muslim countries, he's right.

Bill Maher should generally be ignored.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

Bill Maher should generally be ignored.

He certainly says some very ignorant things (like vaccines cause autism) but he's actually been remarkably lucid and appropriately critical of progressives who have turned an almost complete blind eye to the way that women are treated in the Middle East.

[corianderstem]

I really liked what Salman Rushdie had to say about this:

In part, "I stand with Charlie Hebdo, as we all must, to defend the art of satire, which has always been a force for liberty and against tyranny, dishonesty and stupidity."

Salman Rushdie: I stand with 'Charlie Hebdo' | Shelf Life | EW.com

[Snowlock]

Originally Posted by deep

these killers are true believers that want anyone killed that blasphemes The Prophet. If any member of their family or if they themselves ever did that they 100% believe they should be killed.

Bullshit. That's the lie in this. That these terrorists are some sort of purists. The night before 911 the terrorists were drinking and partying. They found porn in Bin Laden's house. These people aren't believers, they're radicals and there's a world of difference between the two. A radical is just a crazy person; period. If religion hadn't ever been invented, they'd just find something else to latch their crazy on to.

[Vlad n U 2]

Can mama cass etc. explain what these images mean? I can't understand French.

 

__________________