so english speaking countries refuse to show depictions of muhammed after all

woow this is getting pathetic. The guy is dead....showing some silly cartoons just to piss people off isnt getting him back. Get over it already. 20 people died and people act like this is the worst tragedy in history. Its sad what happened, but its becoming to much now

I don't think the intent is just to piss people off. The intent is to show that (a) Mohammed himself would be saddened by what is done in his name; and (b) that a free Western press cannot be beaten down with violence.

c63d9640-868b-4334-a4f0-d4c4d7800793-bestSizeAvailable.jpeg


Both are very important points in Western society, and to call it 'just a matter of silly cartoons' requires being essentially autistic to why millions of people are in the streets of France, why people support Hebdo, why people are offended by Hebdo, etc.

It certainly isn't the worst tragedy in terms of loss of human life, nobody disputes that, but in terms of an assault on press freedom -- one of the most central values of every non-shitty human society -- it's the biggest event in years. So yeah, it's a big deal to affirm and support press freedom, which is under continual assault, when things like this happen.
 
I don't think the intent is just to piss people off. The intent is to show that (a) Mohammed himself would be saddened by what is done in his name; and (b) that a free Western press cannot be beaten down with violence.

c63d9640-868b-4334-a4f0-d4c4d7800793-bestSizeAvailable.jpeg


Both are very important points in Western society, and to call it 'just a matter of silly cartoons' requires being essentially autistic to why millions of people are in the streets of France, why people support Hebdo, why people are offended by Hebdo, etc.

It certainly isn't the worst tragedy in terms of loss of human life, nobody disputes that, but in terms of an assault on press freedom -- one of the most central values of every non-shitty human society -- it's the biggest event in years. So yeah, it's a big deal to affirm and support press freedom, which is under continual assault, when things like this happen.

People are followers and the only reason we have this reaction is not because 95% of people understand or fully cares about freedom of speech. But the emotional reporting from the media which has galvanized people. Yeah this issue will sell 3 million and for 1 week people will say the trendy je suis charlie and then move on. How much will the next issue sell? People will forget about this and move on. When you put on the new and 40 mins of the news is reported to this incident and then you hear and in Nigeria 120 people was killed for 5 seconds and move on to the next subject. It clearly doesnt register with people how many 120 people lives are and how these peoples family friends are feeling exactly like the ones in france.

Also I honestly feel far more sadness for the innocent hostages than these cartoonists. These guys loved to mock people and knew fully well the consequences and choose to do it, because for them mocking people is worth dying for. And they did die for it. if you gave them a choice today and say we could go back in time and you stop what you are doing and be alive or choose the same fate, they would choose the same fate. So in many ways they went out doing what they loved and believed in.....and good for them.
 
People are followers and the only reason we have this reaction is not because 95% of people understand or fully cares about freedom of speech. But the emotional reporting from the media which has galvanized people. Yeah this issue will sell 3 million and for 1 week people will say the trendy je suis charlie and then move on. How much will the next issue sell? People will forget about this and move on. When you put on the new and 40 mins of the news is reported to this incident and then you hear and in Nigeria 120 people was killed for 5 seconds and move on to the next subject. It clearly doesnt register with people how many 120 people lives are and how these peoples family friends are feeling exactly like the ones in france.

You might as well dissolve the whole War Room if were going by what you consider threadworthy. This applies to just about everything. We can get rid of the Heavyweights too because they're only discussing the next big thing :rolleyes:
 
Well might be forbidden for muslims to depict mohammed
But it's not forbidden for non muslims as far I'm concerned.
 
You might as well dissolve the whole War Room if were going by what you consider threadworthy. This applies to just about everything. We can get rid of the Heavyweights too because they're only discussing the next big thing :rolleyes:

My point is this whole thing has become trendy now....bunch of people say je suis charlie and the media acting like this is the worst tragedy. We see worst thing happen every single day in this world. If anything it shows how much control the media has over people and how they can control our thoughts and emotions.
 
People are followers and the only reason we have this reaction is not because 95% of people understand or fully cares about freedom of speech. But the emotional reporting from the media which has galvanized people. Yeah this issue will sell 3 million and for 1 week people will say the trendy je suis charlie and then move on. How much will the next issue sell? People will forget about this and move on. When you put on the new and 40 mins of the news is reported to this incident and then you hear and in Nigeria 120 people was killed for 5 seconds and move on to the next subject. It clearly doesnt register with people how many 120 people lives are and how these peoples family friends are feeling exactly like the ones in france.

Also I honestly feel far more sadness for the innocent hostages than these cartoonists. These guys loved to mock people and knew fully well the consequences and choose to do it, because for them mocking people is worth dying for. And they did die for it. if you gave them a choice today and say we could go back in time and you stop what you are doing and be alive or choose the same fate, they would choose the same fate. So in many ways they went out doing what they loved and believed in.....and good for them.

Again, I don't think it's a question of 'sadness for the slain.' If you think this is primarily about mourning the lives lost, you are missing the point entirely. We all know that tens of thousands of people die every day, often in horrible ways. It is not simply that these guys died, it is that a founding principle of the French republic -- freedom of speech -- was attacked in the most violent manner possible.

You just seem completely tone-deaf to what the protests are about, interpreting them as 'media manipulated into feeling sad because these guys died.' I myself don't feel particularly sad that these guys died; lots of people die, it's all sad. That was never the point. You seem not to grasp this.

I agree they would do the same thing again, and that is precisely why their colleagues are in fact doing the same thing again. They believe in freedom of speech as something worth fighting for. And given its immense importance in our society relative to the actual statistical risk you run by fighting for it, that's an admirable and sensible thing to fight for.
 
My point is this whole thing has become trendy now....bunch of people say je suis charlie and the media acting like this is the worst tragedy. We see worst thing happen every single day in this world. If anything it shows how much control the media has over people and how they can control our thoughts and emotions.

I actually agree with you but it doesn't mean it isn't worth getting behind.
 
Rather convenient isn't it?

UK tv now airing programs such as;
White angry and British. About a so called far right. Hating on others. When all it really is worried folk pissed about uslam.
24 hours in custody. Showing white chavs and muslim officers.

It's all so fuckiing convenient

I swear this countrys government has muhammeds dick in its mouth
 
My point is this whole thing has become trendy now....bunch of people say je suis charlie and the media acting like this is the worst tragedy. We see worst thing happen every single day in this world. If anything it shows how much control the media has over people and how they can control our thoughts and emotions.

You might be right about the media and the way people
are influenced by it. But in this case their cause is just.

We cannot let these assholes dictate what we can say or draw,
as long as it not against the law.

And if those easily influenced people also get that message,
that's only for the better, because then it spreads to a wider audience.
 
I don't think the intent is just to piss people off. The intent is to show that (a) Mohammed himself would be saddened by what is done in his name; and (b) that a free Western press cannot be beaten down with violence.

c63d9640-868b-4334-a4f0-d4c4d7800793-bestSizeAvailable.jpeg


Both are very important points in Western society, and to call it 'just a matter of silly cartoons' requires being essentially autistic to why millions of people are in the streets of France, why people support Hebdo, why people are offended by Hebdo, etc.

It certainly isn't the worst tragedy in terms of loss of human life, nobody disputes that, but in terms of an assault on press freedom -- one of the most central values of every non-shitty human society -- it's the biggest event in years. So yeah, it's a big deal to affirm and support press freedom, which is under continual assault, when things like this happen.

Well put, I think this nails why it was such a big deal outside of sheer numbers of deaths.
 
I'd like to provide a little context here.

There is nothing that justifies the use of violence against reporters. Nothing, ever, period. That doesn't change the fact that those cartoons never should have been published, and I'll tell you why.

There is a legitimate sense of fear and distrust in the middle east towards the west. The west has, for the last 60 years, supported brutal tyrants and repressive monarchies in the middle east - and middle eastern people know that. Westerners like to forget about the fact that Saddam was America's puppet, or that the CIA trained Bin Laden - but they know that stuff in the middle east. They haven't forgotten.

The USA likes to brag about their support for the coup in 1953 that led to the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Iran, for example. The CIA still brags about it as an example of a perfectly executed operation.
The brutal, US supported monarchy that replaced Iran's democratically elected government was overthrown in 1979, and now we have the Iran of today. People in the middle east know that, they haven't forgotten, and they aren't happy about it.

Many people in the middle east tend to know that the USA sent money and weapons to support the savage regime of Saddam Hussein. They know the USA supports the house of Saud in Saudi Arabia, another brutal and repressive monarchy. They know the USA supported Mubarak in Egypt. People know these facts. They know the west has a history of almost uniformly supporting dictators and tyrants in the middle east.

People also know that Osama Bin Laden was in Pakistan, and not Afghanistan. The USA invaded Afghanistan to catch Bin Laden, so their invasion was launched under a bullshit pretext. Soon after that invasion, another invasion, in Iraq. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - that's the second invasion of a middle eastern country launched for no good reason inside 10 years.

So for the last 60 years the west been supporting brutal tyrants in the middle east. In the last 15 years the leader of the free world, the USA, has committed two major war crimes by invading two middle eastern countries without the backing of the United Nations and without a proper pretext.

Maybe American's don't care about international law, but weaker, more defenseless countries *do*. People in those regions become especially enraged when the west breaks international law in a way that causes pain to their families.

Now they see western newspapers mocking their prophet, their culture and their entire belief system. Those newspapers should never have printed those cartoons - and not because "it's wrong to offend Islam", but because given the context we're operating in here, it's extremely distasteful to print trite garbage like that. It's like shooting someone and stealing their things, then mocking them and spitting on them.

Those newspapers had every right to print those cartoons consequence free, but they should never have printed them in the first place, for the reasons I listed above.
They hate the west and what it's done but yet they keep coming to our countries in the millions.

I call bs. And I hope someone arranges a mass letter drop on Muslim countries with that depiction of Muhammad and the toddler 'just married'. After all, it's true so it shouldn't be offensive.
 
Well might be forbidden for muslims to depict mohammed
But it's not forbidden for non muslims as far I'm concerned.

It's not even forbidden for Muslims. The misconceptions on this point are unbelievably annoying, and it doesn't help that Muslims try to play it up as though it was an issue of their sacred special religious beliefs about depicting Mohammed, when in fact it is *entirely* about unbelievers *insulting* Mohammed.

There is admittedly an extremist strand of historical Islamic culture that forbids Muslims from displaying any images of prophets, considering that to be a type of idolatry, which is why ISIS is destroying tombs of Jonah and such as we speak. But it was never part of the Qur'an/hadith/shariah. It was more of a cultural practice that emerged in certain parts of medieval Islam. Up to that point, depictions of Mohammed were relatively common even within Islam itself. Here is Mohammed riding his mystical human-headed horse to the 'furthest mosque' (really fucking weird, I know):

nizami_lg-419x600.jpg


And the reason a medieval Muslim reaction emerged against such imagery was not because it was 'offensive' but rather because it was perceived as a potential form of *idolatry*, since people might worship the image. Certainly nobody is worshipping the cover of Charlie Hebdo.

It's true that modern Muslims are often offended by images of Mohammed, but it has absolutely nothing to do with any religious prohibition within Islam -- it comes from the view that Mohammed cannot be mocked, and that Westerners are depicting Mohammed solely to mock him. In other words, it is a feature of Muslim feelings vis a vis the confrontation between Islam and other world religions, with Muslims feeling that everybody must respect their prophet (despite the corresponding lack of respect for other religious traditions that is inherent within Islam itself). The Muslim position on this is no different than a Christian being angered by Muslims talking about the corruption in the New Testament.
 
I don't know anything about Britain, but don't they have some sort of anti-racism laws in place. Might get you in trouble posting racist caricatures.
 
I don't know anything about Britain, but don't they have some sort of anti-racism laws in place. Might get you in trouble posting racist caricatures.

It might, but people aren't quite clear on the fact that Charlie Hebdo caricatures *everybody*. The issue that came out on the day they were killed included a caricature of Michel Houellebecq, my favorite contemporary French novelist (and surely the most influential at the global level). Here's that cover:

cover.jpg


That's how they caricature people. Has nothing to do with racism. That the person in question has darker skin, or is ethnic, does not somehow mean their features are immune from caricature -- the question is whether they caricature people of different races at a similar level, not whether they happen to caricature somebody who is a minority ("is he not white? Then we can't caricature him, that would be racist, only white men are exalted enough to be caricatured!").
 
They hate the west and what it's done but yet they keep coming to our countries in the millions.

I call bs. And I hope someone arranges a mass letter drop on Muslim countries with that depiction of Muhammad and the toddler 'just married'. After all, it's true so it shouldn't be offensive.

Why do you think they come here? To escape the dictators that we support, in many instances! If you're an immigrant, well, you might not like that the west supported Saddam but if you get the chance to escape his rule and go somewhere else, you'll usually take it. People choose to come here because we have wealth and opportunity here.

Where does our wealth come from, btw? If someone asked you "why are some countries poor and some countries rich" could you answer them? Just a question, because many, many people have a hard time answering that question.
 
Rather convenient isn't it?

UK tv now airing programs such as;
White angry and British. About a so called far right. Hating on others. When all it really is worried folk pissed about uslam.
24 hours in custody. Showing white chavs and muslim officers.

It's all so fuckiing convenient

I swear this countrys government has muhammeds dick in its mouth

For balance the media has got to show the racist rightwing even though their actions are not even remotely comparable to militant Islam and Islamic chauvinism but you knows the media gotz to play it up to act balanced:rolleyes:
 
Back
Top