Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by IceJJFish(II))
    No sympathy.
    W.T.F.???????

    Freedom of speech is a basic principle on which democracy is supported.

    If it offends some people enough to commit murder or violence, then clearly those people do not belong to a liberal democracy or deserve any of the privileges it provides.

    Starting with you.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missfats)
    That is an absurd comparison.
    Sorry. I agree that it is not a completely apt comparison. At least the Israeli soldiers were facing some kind of violent provocation - even if it was only children throwing stones.

    The journalists were merely involved in the publication of a satirical newspaper.

    My bad.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by generic_man)
    So in other words, the punch thing wasn't a metaphor, it was a pointless non-sequitur. Consider deleting it because it looks an awful lot like you're justifying mass murder.



    Wow. Nice and authoritarian. At least they get one warning, though eh? :rolleyes: So again, as I was deeply offended by your post, would you be OK if I reported you to the authorities and got them to warn you that if you offended me again, you would no longer be allowed to post anything on the Internet?
    I don't know what a sequitur is. Well if people choose to interpret it that way, that's on them.

    One warning is plenty. I would if you explained the full basis of your offence, reasons why, how I can go about not offending you again etc fully explained measures
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dexa)
    Is it really standing up at the expense of innocent lives?

    Well ultimately it would the head of the magazine that would agree to publish the material, so it was his call in the end. The workers are simply doing their job. I thought it was stupid that they publish such a thing at a time of already raised racial and religious unrest in the city.
    Wow.

    So on the one side, some people draw and publish a cartoon.

    On the other, random people who weren't identified subjects in the cartoon crashed in and killed everybody.

    And you're placing the blame on the one who published.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L'Evil Fish)
    Wtf is wrong with you?

    Action lead to consequences. That's what theirs was. I don't agree with it, but that's what happens when you provoke a group of loonies.
    Do you really think their intention was to provoke people who would happily kill them?
    Offensive comedy is nothing new, plenty of people find things funny if they're controversial. They're the audience. The journalists weren't 'asking for it' at all.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dexa)
    It was a stupid thing to do given the recent terror attacks in Paris over the last month. Why put lives at risk just to prove that you have freedom of speech?
    Without events like this, we won't know we don't actually have freedom of speech any more.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Texx)
    Do you really think their intention was to provoke people who would happily kill them?
    Offensive comedy is nothing new, plenty of people find things funny if they're controversial. They're the audience. The journalists weren't 'asking for it' at all.
    Maybe they didn't realise they'd actually get killed, but yes, their intention was to offend and make a laughing stock of a persona associated with a mass of people.

    I hope that audience are happy.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dexa)
    The priority to should be safety of people, not freedom of speech. This incident could have been avoided.
    And the way to do it is to appease the violent people? :confused:

    Britain should've surrendered during WWII then, since the safety of the people should be priority.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L'Evil Fish)
    I don't know what a sequitur is. Well if people choose to interpret it that way, that's on them.

    One warning is plenty. I would if you explained the full basis of your offence, reasons why, how I can go about not offending you again etc fully explained measures
    Alright then, I was offended because I value free speech very highly and your comment suggested that it should be severely limited and that innocent people should face consequences for offending others. If you would like to avoid offending me again and thus receive another warning, preventing you from using the internet freely, please never criticise free speech ever again or suggest that it should be limited in any way.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L'Evil Fish)
    Maybe they didn't realise they'd actually get killed, but yes, their intention was to offend and make a laughing stock of a persona associated with a mass of people.

    I hope that audience are happy.
    What's wrong with poking fun at religious figures? It is amusing to lots of people, including some associated with the religion in question. And there's no point trying not to offend people, people will get offended by anything.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The cop shot dead in the video was an unarmed city policeman on bicycle. Ironically he was probably a muslim (his name was Ahmed).
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Gunning down a dozen people is definitely a fair response for drawing a few cartoons of a fictional person.

    Nothing wrong with that at all...







    \s.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dexa)
    Well we didn't win did we, 11 innocent people are dead.
    Let's just surrender the world to terrorists. Maybe you should turn yourself in to set an example.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L'Evil Fish)
    Maybe they didn't realise they'd actually get killed, but yes, their intention was to offend and make a laughing stock of a persona associated with a mass of people.

    I hope that audience are happy.
    How do you know that? I really doubt that many French Muslims are regular readers of a small circulation far-left anti-Islamic magazine therefore it would be rather foolish of the editors to aim cartoons at them. The cartoons were aimed at their regular readers who were likely to already be anti-religious and would agree with the cartoon's messages.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by matthewduncan)
    this is what happens when you think its funny to trouble people that dont troubke you.
    should have just left the moslems and their religion alone instead of starting trouble with those cartoons
    a perfect slave mentality

    congrats
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Half the people on this thread actually attempting to justify this goes to show why it will never stop, extreme left-wingers will find a way to blame everybody but the terrorists.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hahahoran18)
    IS would definately disagree with everyone except themselves. They are a mad terror group with NOTHING to do with islam.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    This is a whole new level of delusion.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Damn mad. The cause of it is definitely a religion and no one can deny it. I don't care how people interprete it- in a wrong way or not but that is causing too much troubles already.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L'Evil Fish)
    Maybe they didn't realise they'd actually get killed, but yes, their intention was to offend and make a laughing stock of a persona associated with a mass of people.

    I hope that audience are happy.
    yes, yes, blame the victims...

    the freedom to make fun about religion is one of the great achievements of humanity

    and it will never disappear, as much as terrorists try to stifle it by violent means

    the first effect of this massacre will be a wave of solidarity for anti-Islam criticism and discourse; but also (unfortunately) a wave of hostility towards individual Muslims

    the terrorists hope of course for a progressive polarisation in the population : this is the best way for them to gain support among the Muslim community
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L'Evil Fish)
    Punch is justified.
    Death is not.
    A reaction is also justified, although I'd have preferred something like groups protesting.

    So don't put words into my mouth.

    Warning. If they continued to produce the stuff, shut down.
    so every muslim would have the right to punch them, or is it one punch regardless of the intensity of the devotion towards to individual, what about things that mock hitler do nazi groups also have the right to attack, or politicians and political magazines that mock them
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 22, 2015
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.