drdeath Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 A bunch of extremists who more than likely believe in martyrdom have gone and created martyrs out of a bunch of cartoonists. I hope they catch as many of them as possible alive and make them see exactly how the world has reacted to their actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I'm not sure if Irwin would have said the day he was stung would have been the most dangerous thing he'd ever done, but the people publishing these cartoons had to know it was pretty high on their lists if it wasn't surely at the very top. I'd liken it more to that guy who picks on the biggest guy in the bar and hopes having all his friends there is enough to keep him from a beating. That big guy might be a cocky son of a bitch, but you can bet the guy picking the fight knows full well what he's doing and enjoys the attention if he gets away with it. Challenge the norms and all that, but pick your battles as well - and sure as hell make sure the battle you're fighting is worth the losses you might incur. It was something steve said many times before he did something dangerous. Me I believe they were just peverse people like myself , tell me I cannot do something that seems harmless IMO and i am gonna go ahead and do it anyway. As I have stated and quoted on this forum before when other members challenge me on the fact i only take the piss outa christians , you will never hear a crack about muhammed because I don't wanna get shot in the chest . I am just watching a muslim smoking them all in the Paree- dakar , Go Nasser , really hoping he wins this year he really deserves it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 good post. I agree with almost all of it so I'm going to only reply to the bits that I am not necessarily in full agreement. re: bolded. Is it a requirement of democratic societies to have the citizens on board however, given that it can potentially lead to disastrous consequences we have things like the constitution put in place to protect a basic set of rights for every individual here in Canada. despite a process being democratic, is it okay if a state decides that non heterosexual people are denied certain rights because majority of the state believes that way? Similarly, I don't think even the democratic processes should be able to alter a universal set of human rights. I think France is behind other democratic nations in that regard, won't you agree? i'm too spineless to say. on one hand, i personally agree with the ideas you're saying, but on the other hand... how can we police what people vote for? like, if 82% vote for one thing, who is going to step in and say, 'hold on, you morons'? i mean, democracy produced Hitler for god's sake. Bush was LITERALLY ELECTED A SECOND TERM. it's obviously not a pristine process. let's put on our tinfoil hats and be honest: votes are incurred and movements incited largely through the irrationality, fear, ignorance, and insecurity of the population. people are stupid. i'm stupid. we're all stupid, to some degree, simply by virtue of our faith in ourselves or in authority, and because of our fear of each other [/Hobbes]. but as that woman in that one Ali G clip says, democracy may just be the lesser of each political evil france is also a really weird place. its liberalism, sometimes, to me, seems like a masquerade, or extremely selective. i really wonder if its current socialist failures (not to mention today's 'action') will see the rise in some right wing thinkers/beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I'm not sure if Irwin would have said the day he was stung would have been the most dangerous thing he'd ever done, but the people publishing these cartoons had to know it was pretty high on their lists if it wasn't surely at the very top. I'd liken it more to that guy who picks on the biggest guy in the bar and hopes having all his friends there is enough to keep him from a beating. That big guy might be a cocky son of a bitch, but you can bet the guy picking the fight knows full well what he's doing and enjoys the attention if he gets away with it. Challenge the norms and all that, but pick your battles as well - and sure as hell make sure the battle you're fighting is worth the losses you might incur. The thing is these cartoonists didn't just start making fun of Muslims recently to antagonize. It was something the were already doing. The principles of their life's work involved making fun of all people all the time. To expect them to stop because they'd received a few threatening letters just was not going to happen. Personally I think the magazine was crass and unfunny, but that's what they chose to do with their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 It was something steve said many times before he did something dangerous. Me I believe they were just peverse people like myself , tell me I cannot do something that seems harmless IMO and i am gonna go ahead and do it anyway. As I have stated and quoted on this forum before when other members challenge me on the fact i only take the piss outa christians , you will never hear a crack about muhammed because I don't wanna get shot in the chest . I am just watching a muslim smoking them all in the Paree- dakar , Go Nasser , really hoping he wins this year he really deserves it. That's like the Tour de France for me, don't want to sit and watch all the footage from every stage, but very interesting to see good highlights and follow the progress. But satire can still be effective without being strictly about getting the most visceral reaction possible. The above "twin pencils" cartoon has a pretty good effect but doesn't single out and violate a religious rule to not depict Muhammad that could unnecessarily anger a group known better for its very violent minority. As you say, there's probably a pretty smart line not to cross (even when crusading for freedom of speech) in everything we do. The publishers surely tried to redraw that if not outright colour outside the lines on purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 i'm too spineless to say. on one hand, i personally agree with the ideas you're saying, but on the other hand... how can we police what people vote for? like, if 82% vote for one thing, who is going to step in and say, 'hold on, you morons'? i mean, democracy produced Hitler for god's sake. Bush was LITERALLY ELECTED A SECOND TERM. it's obviously not a pristine process. let's put on our tinfoil hats and be honest: votes are incurred and movements incited largely through the irrationality, fear, ignorance, and insecurity of the population. people are stupid. i'm stupid. we're all stupid, to some degree, simply by virtue of our faith in ourselves or in authority, and because of our fear of each other [/Hobbes]. but as that woman in that one Ali G clip says, democracy may just be the lesser of each political evil france is also a really weird place. its liberalism, sometimes, to me, seems like a masquerade, or extremely selective. i really wonder if its current socialist failures (not to mention today's 'action') will see the rise in some right wing thinkers/beliefs. European politics are way more extreme than ours. They have full on fascist and communist parties running and winning large amounts of votes. All major North American parties would be very centrist in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Apparently that picture doesn't belong to Banksy. Someone using a fake twitter account under his name Yeah doesn't look like his style at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Yeah doesn't look like his style at all. Given what he does for a living - I seriously doubt he'd question the intent of the drawing. Edit: given the events of today I can see why this post is a problem tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 As the quote goes, "Freedom is never free". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 As the quote goes, "Freedom is never free". According to Parker Randolph S it costs a buck 'o five Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 First, the journalists are not to blame for this. Exercising freedom of expression isn't something you should have to apologize for. If someone an easily offended cry baby about what you have to say then that's their problem and also their right, as is yours to express. That doesn't mean they have the right to kill you for it. Second, such journalistic depictions and mocking of Mohammad aren't exactly hateful. One major reason the faithful take issue with what others say about their religion is that they're afraid they might actually be correct about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheXFactor Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 First, the journalists are not to blame for this. Exercising freedom of expression isn't something you should have to apologize for. If someone an easily offended cry baby about what you have to say then that's their problem and also their right, as is yours to express. That doesn't mean they have the right to kill you for it. Second, such journalistic depictions and mocking of Mohammad aren't exactly hateful. One major reason the faithful take issue with what others say about their religion is that they're afraid they might actually be correct about it. So if I verbally oppressed women because I have freedom of speech I shouldn't have to apologize for it? Going by your logic of course. Women wouldn't have the right to kill me for it, but I wouldn't be surprised if a group of them decided to do so. As for this magazine that supposedly likes to mock Mohammad... don't ever try to piss someone off if you aren't prepared for what they might do. Fact of life, really. The journalists are partially to blame. If I poked a bear and it mauled my ass I would expect people to blame me for being an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special Ed Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 So if I verbally oppressed women because I have freedom of speech I shouldn't have to apologize for it? Going by your logic of course. Women wouldn't have the right to kill me for it, but I wouldn't be surprised if a group of them decided to do so. As for this magazine that supposedly likes to mock Mohammad... don't ever try to piss someone off if you aren't prepared for what they might do. Fact of life, really. The journalists are partially to blame. If I poked a bear and it mauled my ass I would expect people to blame me for being an idiot. Well you're right. The journalists poked the bear. Although I think "bear" is a little more respectable compared to the actual animals which are responsible for this rampage. A bear at least kills for reason. But these mindless apes had no good reason for killing any of those people. Perhaps the only thing these muslims have in common with a bear, is that killing is in their nature. Animals indeed. In other news these kinds of attacks have been a regular occurrence for Israel. Nobody really pays attention anymore, though unless Israel is the one to blame. Even though recently a Palestinian group had plotted to massacre as many Jews as possible in a wedding hall. After one of the Palestinians that worked there realized it holds up to 1,800 people. Why not dress up like Jews and invite yourself in with Uzis right? Well their plan failed, you can google it. But I feel for the Jews since they deal with this the most. Even though the Jews are no angels but I don't think an angel survives under such conditions. That is probably why Israel has some of the best security in the world. I could care less one way or the other. I'm not Jewish or Muslim. I'm happy with my circle around me and content with browsing the bad news online, typing RIP every so often while shaking my head. Humans truly are just the ants of the universe fighting over a crumb. Shame really...we could accomplish so much more. Perhaps will but by the looks of things, not in this lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 So if I verbally oppressed women because I have freedom of speech I shouldn't have to apologize for it? Going by your logic of course. Women wouldn't have the right to kill me for it, but I wouldn't be surprised if a group of them decided to do so. As for this magazine that supposedly likes to mock Mohammad... don't ever try to piss someone off if you aren't prepared for what they might do. Fact of life, really. The journalists are partially to blame. If I poked a bear and it mauled my ass I would expect people to blame me for being an idiot. It would make you an asshole but why should you apologize? Is there a law somewhere saying you have to? Are apologies for dumb ass remarks a pillar of developed society like free speech is? Again, you have the right to say stupid things about women and they have the right to be butt hurt about it. No they aren't to blame. If I criticize tomato soup saying it sucks and someone murders me for that remark, I'm partially to blame? I have the right to say what I want about their prophet. They have the right to be a whiny little piss ant about it. They don't have the right to kill me for that. That's how western society functions nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2SKATES1STICK Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 They may not murder, but there is evidence of censorship...like when the Israeli government hires tech students to monitor anti-semitic activity on social media sites so they can basically ostracize the original poster by using fake aliases/accounts. yeah because that's equivalent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocivus Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Headline: Charlie Hebdo: Gun Muslim Terrorist attack on French magazine kills 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucklehead Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 - isn't using or creating am image of the prophet Muhammad strictly prohibited in their religion? The way I see it the cartoonist is not Muslim. If you are one then I suppose you should adhere to that and not create any image of him. I will never understand why I should be expected to tow the dogmatic line of some archaic belief system I clearly don't belong to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Then insult the cartoonists. Don't threaten them. Don't assault them. Don't murder them. Of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 The two main suspects in the Islamist attack on Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris are said to have robbed a service station in the north of France. Anti-terrorism police have converged on an area near Villers-Cotterets where the gunmen were reported by French media to have stolen food and petrol. France has observed a minute's silence for the 12 people killed at the office of the satirical magazine. Earlier, a gunman shot dead a policewoman south of Paris and fled. It is unclear if the attack in Montrouge, in which a second person was seriously injured, was linked to the Charlie Hebdo shooting, but French prosecutors say they are treating it as a "terrorist act", AFP reports. The manager of the service station that was robbed on the RN2 road, in the Aisne region, at about 10:30 (09:30 GMT) said the attackers fit the description of the two men, and were heavily armed with Kalashnikovs and rocket-propelled grenade launchers. How the hell did they get grenade launchers???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.