Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    What does that even mean?



    The Muhammad cartoons do not constitute "mocking a race", nor do they discriminate under any law.

    You are completely wrong in your analysis of European law, domestic and otherwise. What precedent or legislation have you used to come to your conclusion?

    Let me get it straight for you: Charlie Hebdo published satirical cartoons of Muhammad. In Europe, there is generally no right to not be offended by something, particularly satire of religious belief. Therefore what Charlie Hebdo did was completely within French law, and also within the European Convention on Human Rights.



    The mocking of religious belief, particularly in the form of satire, is a long-held tradition in Europe. It is particularly valid when people hold such religious beliefs, which include homophobia, up as perfect and sacrosanct. If people are offended by that, and don't "take lightly" to that (which I presume you mean murdering in response), then that is their own irrational prerogative.



    This is where your logic extends to: say in 25 years time the far right gains a massive foothold in Europe. They say "publish the Qur'an, which we find offensive, and suffer the consequences". Are publishers of the Qur'an "provoking" a violent response by continue to publish it, or are they continuing to adhere to their conscious that it is their religious freedom to continue to publish it?



    Yes they were. Regardless, what's wrong with dark humour and why shouldn't people get away with it? There is clearly a market for Charlie Hebdo, or else they wouldn't be in business.
    If Muslims were outlawed to the extent they could not practice their religion they would have to move elsewhere, to a predominantly Muslim country. But in today's society, there are strong principles of equality, approaching the situation from a strictly judicial point of view can only conclude to the fact that Hebdo, had they not posted such images would not have suffered an attack.
    From research, this is definitely not the first time action has been taken against them. In recent years editors have received death threats going more than 5 years back, and a firebomb exploded at vacated headquarters after similar caricatures of Muhammad.
    Why then, do Hebdo continue? Certainly not because it's tradition to mock religion. You'd think they'd hold off, its the instinctual reaction, but they seemed to keep pressing buttons until finally there was a reaction. Why continuously make such images with the defence that is promoting freedom of speech. It is stirring unnecessary tension where before there was little and Muslims were generally accepted, to the point theyve forced a reaction and outlawed Muslims, almost a deathwish paving the way for pointless wanton and destruction, hence why I say it would be better it Charlie had just held off.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Muaaz98)
    If Muslims were outlawed to the extent they could not practice their religion they would have to move elsewhere, to a predominantly Muslim country. But in today's society, there are strong principles of equality, approaching the situation from a strictly judicial point of view can only conclude to the fact that Hebdo, had they not posted such images would not have suffered an attack.
    Sorry, how on earth is that a "strictly judicial" point of view? I am really struggling with the terminology you keep using. But generally, yes, had they not published such images, they would not have suffered an attack. But that point is irrelevant, because there are many things that but for us doing, we would not suffer certain consequences. But for me taking the number 6 bus, I wouldn't have been blown up. But for me getting in an argument with a mentally ill person, I would have had my throat slit, etc.

    From research, this is definitely not the first time action has been taken against them. In recent years editors have received death threats going more than 5 years back, and a firebomb exploded at vacated headquarters after similar caricatures of Muhammad.
    So they should have given in to the whim of religious fascists who, on the one hand want the freedom of practise their religion, but on the other hand want to attack people who use their freedom of expression?

    Why then, do Hebdo continue? Certainly not because it's tradition to mock religion. You'd think they'd hold off, its the instinctual reaction, but they seemed to keep pressing buttons until finally there was a reaction.
    Why did people in early 20th century Russia continually mock and protest the Tsar? Even after Bloody Sunday? Because they had a point to prove and wanted change. If you believe that you have a noble point to make, and that you are standing up for liberty, you don't back down because someone threatens you with violence.

    Why continuously make such images with the defence that is promoting freedom of speech. It is stirring unnecessary tension where before there was little and Muslims were generally accepted, to the point theyve forced a reaction and outlawed Muslims, almost a deathwish paving the way for pointless wanton and destruction, hence why I say it would be better it Charlie had just held off.
    Huh? How has this "outlawed" Muslims? Has there been a legal change via the French Parliament that I do not know about?

    What has stirred unnecessary tension is the grotesquely disproportionate and irrational response to the publishing of mere cartoons. That is what has caused unnecessary tension.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amenahussein)
    Nobody supports his killing, at all. But we all agree he was a foul human-being


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Uh, Charlie Hebdo isn't a person, it's the name of the magazine that was attacked.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not really that clued up on the whole thing but I hate the way these stupid slogans pop up, They often originate on twitter or are propagated by it kind of like the stupid #get kony thing in 2012.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    There will be the second Charlie... and the third Charlie... and the fourth... Charlie never dies. He,like a cat,has nine lives!

    Freedom of speech will always exist.

    No religions or no Muslim terrorists can spoil the beauty of liberty...freedom of speech!

    Gee... I should become a politician. Lol.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    100% agree. I already shared my reasons in the other post about this so I might as-well copy & past. They also had a cover talking about surrogacy being slavery & what do you know, they drew a picture of 2 white people walking a black person on all 4s with a leash. Just inserting racism wherever they can & showcasing how they truly feel about black people.

    Charlie Hebdo has made numerous extremely racist etc comics. Although they insult other religions equally, they seem to go one step further when insulting Muslims. Hebdo contributes to the marginalisation of discriminated groups that are already oppressed; its not 'just a cartoon'. Their work is viciously disgusting and goes above satire and into the realm of racism, xenophobia etc. They shouldn't have been killed, I condemn the murders just like I condemn the cartoons. So now, Charlie Hebdo is now being put on a pedestal as a western saviour and campaigner for free speech. They never were. If you champion free speech, you will not support Charlie Hebdo's work as they use it as a blanket to spread hate, islamophobia, racism and incite violence/ xenophobia.

    So no, I am not Charlie. If I am anyone it would be Ahmed, the (muslim) policeman who was killed. He died protecting Charlie Hebdo who ridiculed his culture, ethnicity and faith. He died defending and protecting free speech and is a true hero.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amenahussein)
    If you are depending Charlie, or doing this whole trend about 'I'm Charlie', you are basically depending antisemitism, racism, Islamophoba, bigotry and xenophobia.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    "Defending" Jesus Christ. But I got ya. Damn that auto correct.

    Anyway, do people still do racist satires? Really? ****'s sake, how hack. In a normal place, it's against civil rights. The killers should have taken them to court and take down the company. Not kill them.

    There is a saying that goes, "Kill not the prophet; kill their philosophy." Now all these people care more about "freedom of press" than they do the racism (shocker), on the account of, "they were murderers."
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophiaLDN)
    100% agree. I already shared my reasons in the other post about this so I might as-well copy & past. They also had a cover talking about surrogacy being slavery & what do you know, they drew a picture of 2 white people walking a black person on all 4s with a leash. Just inserting racism wherever they can & showcasing how they truly feel about black people.

    Charlie Hebdo has made numerous extremely racist etc comics. Although they insult other religions equally, they seem to go one step further when insulting Muslims. Hebdo contributes to the marginalisation of discriminated groups that are already oppressed; its not 'just a cartoon'. Their work is viciously disgusting and goes above satire and into the realm of racism, xenophobia etc. They shouldn't have been killed, I condemn the murders just like I condemn the cartoons. So now, Charlie Hebdo is now being put on a pedestal as a western saviour and campaigner for free speech. They never were. If you champion free speech, you will not support Charlie Hebdo's work as they use it as a blanket to spread hate, islamophobia, racism and incite violence/ xenophobia.

    So no, I am not Charlie. If I am anyone it would be Ahmed, the (muslim) policeman who was killed. He died protecting Charlie Hebdo who ridiculed his culture, ethnicity and faith. He died defending and protecting free speech and is a true hero.
    You lost me at "died protecting Charlie."
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pocahontas lol)
    You lost me at "died protecting Charlie."
    How so? The freedom & laws that afforded Charlie Hebdo to exist. He obviously knew there was a target at the office/artists who work at Hebdo, so doing that line of work you could be harmed. He could have easily refused and asked to be relocated to another place.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophiaLDN)
    How so? The freedom & laws that afforded Charlie Hebdo to exist. He obviously knew there was a target at the office/artists who work at Hebdo, so doing that line of work you could be harmed. He could have easily refused and asked to be relocated to another place.
    He was just doing his job. That's not heroic. Heroic is not being a cop and diving in the line of fire anyway. That cop can also be seen as a sellout. But I am not Muslim so eh. I am however a woman of color and don't agree with the racist cartoons. I am not sad one bit that Hebdo is dead but I do not agree with the murders, either. I see you don't, either; I'm just trying to tie it all up.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pocahontas lol)
    He was just doing his job. That's not heroic. Heroic is not being a cop and diving in the line of fire anyway. That cop can also be seen as a sellout. But I am not Muslim so eh. I am however a woman of color and don't agree with the racist cartoons. I am not sad one bit that Hebdo is dead but I do not agree with the murders, either. I see you don't, either; I'm just trying to tie it all up.
    Fair enough. I think it is given that they go against everything he is. Yeah man, Its sad that they were killed as they shouldn't have been harmed but I also don't feel sad for them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophiaLDN)
    Fair enough. I think it is given that they go against everything he is. Yeah man, Its sad that they were killed as they shouldn't have been harmed but I also don't feel sad for them.
    Don't say that too loud
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophiaLDN)
    100% agree. I already shared my reasons in the other post about this so I might as-well copy & past. They also had a cover talking about surrogacy being slavery & what do you know, they drew a picture of 2 white people walking a black person on all 4s with a leash. Just inserting racism wherever they can & showcasing how they truly feel about black people.

    Charlie Hebdo has made numerous extremely racist etc comics. Although they insult other religions equally, they seem to go one step further when insulting Muslims. Hebdo contributes to the marginalisation of discriminated groups that are already oppressed; its not 'just a cartoon'. Their work is viciously disgusting and goes above satire and into the realm of racism, xenophobia etc. They shouldn't have been killed, I condemn the murders just like I condemn the cartoons. So now, Charlie Hebdo is now being put on a pedestal as a western saviour and campaigner for free speech. They never were. If you champion free speech, you will not support Charlie Hebdo's work as they use it as a blanket to spread hate, islamophobia, racism and incite violence/ xenophobia.

    So no, I am not Charlie. If I am anyone it would be Ahmed, the (muslim) policeman who was killed. He died protecting Charlie Hebdo who ridiculed his culture, ethnicity and faith. He died defending and protecting free speech and is a true hero.
    Hyperbolic post. Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing publisher, which even tried to get the Front National banned. Their satire was dark, and beyond our normal sensibilities, but to equate them with an organisation like Golden Dawn (which is essentially what you are doing with your hyperbole) is ridiculous. There is a lot worse out there.

    In addition, Charlie Hebdo did not march through the streets of Paris plastering their cartoons everywhere, or post them through letterboxes. You would have to go out of your way to find them and then experience the reactions you describe.

    If you champion free speech, you will support Charlie Hebdo. You may not agree with the content of the cartoons, but they stood firm in the face of censorship and threats of violence: this makes them a champion of free speech. Also, I support anyone who is violently attacked for utilising their right to free expression, regardless of what they say or publish so long as it is within the law.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IdeasForLife)
    The cartoons below are drawn by Charlie Hebdo, the french magazine which recently got attacked by gunmen.

    It shows a muslim man using the Quran as (bullets going through it) with the caption "the Quran is s*** it doesn't stop bulllets" after the Rabaa massacre in Egypt. Over 1000 Egyptians were killed by their own military whilst peacefully protesting.

    This is one of the reasons I am not charlie. I do not make fun of massacres.I am above that. If someone where to make fun of holocaust victims, they would be called quite a few bad names(and rightly so). It shouldn't be any different when people make fun of other atrocities.

    The other cartoon shows, Mrs Taubira, a government minister, as a monkey simply because she is a black woman. I do not support racism, so yet again, I am not Charlie.

    Just to add - I do not support the gunmen or anything of the like.

    The images are in the spoiler, you may find them offensive, so I've given you the option whether you wish to view them or not.
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Wow, I never knew this. I'm also not in favour of this, its freedom of speech sure, but its trashy and not something I would ever support or read myself.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe01223)
    you got it wrong mate. I was responding to someone else. I know the cartoons are deeply offensive and the cartoons were basically asking for a reaction.
    Yeh and I saw a woman the other day with a short skirt. She was asking to be raped

    I am just using your logic
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    The most hyperbolic post ever. Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing publisher, which even tried to get the Front National banned. Their satire was dark, and beyond our normal sensibilities, but to equate them with an organisation like Golden Dawn (which is essentially what you are doing with your hyperbole) is ridiculous.

    In addition, Charlie Hebdo did not march through the streets of Paris plastering their cartoons everywhere, or post them through letterboxes. You would have to go out of your way to find them and then experience the reactions you describe.

    If you champion free speech, you will support Charlie Hebdo. You may not agree with the content of the cartoons, but they stood firm in the face of censorship and threats of violence: this makes them a champion of free speech. Also, I support anyone who is violently attacked for utilising their right to free expression, regardless of what they say or publish so long as it is within the law.
    Since when is freedom of press more crucial than confronting racism? Sure they confronted it barbarically. But it's not right to support Charlie. If people had any concern for racism (referring to the monkey one in OP) then they wouldn't so blindly advocate for freedom of press behind support for the publisher who is behind those offensive satires; just because they were killed is that justification to support them?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tom_Ford)
    No, the context you miss is that it is an ongoing war between the west and the Islamic State and other terrorist groups in the Middle East (also France's wonderful and convenient ability to forget it's history in North Africa).
    This is not a regular debate about freedom of expression, in the backdrop of current affairs it is a war. A war that is going on right now away from the comfort of your armchair. I see this event as an overspill from the war which is geographically in the middle east but has been declared to all sympathisers of that particular movement. In that context, in a war, he had it coming. His weapons were his words/drawings (propaganda being a weapon in war). Their weapons were their guns.
    Of course he should not have given in, but he also should have known what environment he/they were publishing the material in.
    Mmm not really. It has nothing to do with the IS.

    They didn't like the Mohammed cartoons because it is blasphemous, so they murdered him.

    No need to try to make it more complex than it actually is
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pocahontas lol)
    Since when is freedom of press more crucial than confronting racism? ?
    When people have their heads blown off it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pocahontas lol)
    Since when is freedom of press more crucial than confronting racism? Sure they confronted it barbarically. But it's not right to support Charlie. If people had any concern for racism (referring to the monkey one in OP) then they wouldn't so blindly advocate for freedom of press behind support for the publisher who is behind those offensive satires; just because they were killed is that justification to support them?
    Get a grip. There is a lot worse out there. I am a proponent of gay rights and have seen a couple of Charlie Hebdo's cartoons which could be construed as homophobic. But I appreciate that they were just perpetuating dark humour, for which there is a market, and probably did not wish for gay people to be hurt or criminalised. They were left-wing after all. I also appreciate that any offence I feel is my own doing, as I have specifically decided to search for such cartoons, when I could just ignore them.

    And "confronting racism" is so subjective. The Daily Mail, and indeed numerous other newspapers, post stuff all the time, including statistics, which do not portray ethnic minorities in a good light. This probably causes more racist feelings than Charlie Hebdo, being the small publication that it is, has ever done. Do we call for those mainstream newspapers to be banned? No.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    The most hyperbolic post ever.
    surely not 'the most...ever'.


    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing publisher
    and so gets mulligans? I just don't know what work this is doing here, still less the bit about seeking to muzzle the FN.

    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    If you champion free speech, you will support Charlie Hebdo.
    there's room for more nuance than this. It isn't a binary choice between opposing free speech and supporting Charlie Hebdo in this silly hashtagging sense. I support the right of Charlie Hebdo to say what it wants to say, but my feeling that what it wants to say is actually horrible makes me loathe now to say 'I am Charlie Hebdo'. Indeed, it'd be doubly dishonest since I am only a supporter and not what you style a ''champion'' of free speech, I don't share their courage and can't claim to, and because I think theirs is a bloody awful magazine.

    We reach for local analogs the better to understand and there seems to be a popular notion here that this murderous attack on a satirical magazine was something like the storming of Viz or Private Eye, dear Ian Hislop gunned down for irreverence. The truth is that there is no close analog for Charlie Hebdo in this country. It'd be closed down by a left-wing campaign except that it wouldn't have to be - because closed down by market forces, there's no popular appetite for that kind of nastiness here.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
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.