emraphoto
Veteran
i am not about to make any comment on what has happened in Paris, other than it is completely unacceptable in my eyes.
i will say, having been on the front lines of the attempts to ''kill them', that this approach is only making matters much worse. i would also add that if we understand the behaviour of Wahhabi or Salafist movements as 'hating freedom' we are dangerously naive.
none of the above is meant as a personal attack and i understand and share your outrage.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Mike,
My apologies on my post being directed to you - it wasn't meant as such I merely wanted to respond to your initial question:
And my apologies for inferring that you, yourself, are in the U.S.
Cheers,
Dave
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Fair enough, and thanks. And now it's my turn to apologise as I appear to have come across a bit more strongly than I intended.
But I think we're OK. I sure hope so as I really was more interested in discussion than throwing darts.
...Mike
DominikDUK
Well-known
Highway 61 11 people were killed this doesn't change the fact that Charlie Hebdo was not nice but Charlie Hebdo is not the people that were killed, one of them btw was a muslim policeman, Charlie is a newspaper nothing else. The policemen that were killed were not employees of Charlie Hebdo. So people should identify with a non living entity instead of the victims ? I am very sorry for the people that were killed, and I absolutely do not condone this heinous terroristic act but the slogan doesn't do the victims justice either because it completely overshadows the victims. But I am sorry if my post has hurt you in any way so I apologize
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Far more.
I believe there's a great deal of discussion to be had regarding freedom of speech (scare quotes or not
) - I sometimes feel there is a double standard but I also recognize that limits may be required. And before anyone calls me a censor (or any other name) - note that I stated "may be" not "must be". I can only draw upon what I, personally, have experienced or what I have learned.
What I have experienced is words can be extremely hurtful and painful - I have never had even the remotest inkling of inflicting any sort of harm against someone who "hurt" me with their name calling, bullying, hatred or such. The ideal of rising above such things is an important one to hold for me. That and forgiveness of the person inflicting the harm. Sadly though, some other people do not follow this method and would, rather, inflict harm. This does not justify the harm inflicted (such as killing innocents) and these people should be brought to justice accordingly.
Cheers,
Dave
DominikDUK
Well-known
There is good satire wich everyone can laugh about, there is bad satire that doesn't work and nasty satire that is intended for ultimate impact and pain which is funny for some but very hurtful for others and Charlie Hebdo was the latter = not nice. Not that I can't appreciate some of their cartoons but some were over the top. Which is no excuse for killing 12 people, because there is nothing that can excuse that killing.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Satire, as Maxwell Smart might have told you, should only be used for Niceness instead of Evil.
...Mike
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Jews have never started a war or a crusade. When one is being put to the sword because of who they are, for whatever beliefs, and against freedom, one should not have to sit still and watch their families being slaughtered.
DominikDUK
Well-known
Photomoof. I agree although disneyland is a very good satire.
Also never said that I am against nast xsatire just that it isn't nice also some very good satires work without harming the people they make fun off something many satirist are not very good at but used to be a sign of good satire.
Also never said that I am against nast xsatire just that it isn't nice also some very good satires work without harming the people they make fun off something many satirist are not very good at but used to be a sign of good satire.
DominikDUK
Well-known
If one takes the old testament as gospel truth there were some wars and not only for selfprotection but they were not for religious resasons and certainly no crusades on that we can agree.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I'd have thought, silly me, that by definition the Old Testament couldn't possibly be "gospel" truth...
...Mike
DominikDUK
Well-known
Sorry you are right. But especially in the history of the middle east which is lacking sources the old testament is one of the main sources for research. There is some truth in it also some weird claims but as in most religious text there are some historically correct parts in it along with exagerations etc... But one shouldn't outright dismiss religious texts as pure fiction they aren't
Highway 61
Revisited
You now make it quite clear, thanks. So :
- I agree to say that the "Je suis Charlie" slogan isn't the best way to react to what happened (yet, no slogan could be appropriated IMO)
- I have to admit that I am not always fond of what I can read in Charlie-Hebdo but this is a matter of personal taste and personal perception of what some good humour is and there is no rule whatsoever for that
- I am still (and probably will be for long) horrified by what happened, because it won't probably end up, and I can't exclude any civil war risk (was it here in France, or in any other Western Europe area)
- I was liking many of the dead cartoonists' works
- I was admiring Bernard Maris' brilliant chronicles (FYI this man wasn't a satirist but an 1st class economist and a literature specialist, so *** with him for muslims feeling insulted with the satiric cartoons published in Charlie-Hebdo ?).
As for how people may want to cleverly approach the nasty "satire vs respect" concept, let's remember what the late Pierre Desproges (the most interesting French humorist of the 1980's) once said :
"My opinion is that we can laugh of anything, but not with anybody. For instance I'd rather prefer to have a good laugh about Auschwitz with a Jew, than seriously playing the Scrabble with Klaus Barbie".
Think over this, buddy.
DominikDUK
Well-known
The thing I fear the most is the retaliation already we have protests against islam and Muslims in Germany and soon in Austria the people behind this demonstrations are FN types and worse. And as I have noted there was already an attack against a mosque in Le Mans and not one week ago the attacks in Sweden.
Regarding your second point I fully agree it is all perception
Your third point echoes my fears.
As for the victims one of the victims was a muslim so why kill him in the name of Islam, Bernard Maris they probably have never heard of him they probably have never read Charlie Hebdo either and I really don't believe that it was about the cartoons it just gave them an excuse they went to Syria and liked killing innocent people and now they come back to France and would have stop but the psychopaths can't stop so they are looking for an excuse to kill.
Regarding your second point I fully agree it is all perception
Your third point echoes my fears.
As for the victims one of the victims was a muslim so why kill him in the name of Islam, Bernard Maris they probably have never heard of him they probably have never read Charlie Hebdo either and I really don't believe that it was about the cartoons it just gave them an excuse they went to Syria and liked killing innocent people and now they come back to France and would have stop but the psychopaths can't stop so they are looking for an excuse to kill.
Highway 61
Revisited
Yes.
Read this :
http://www.liberation.fr/societe/20...istes-nous-tendent-un-piege-politique_1175717
There is nothing more clever to say than what Robert Badinter did.
All the murderers are about to be arrested, this is a matter of a couple of hours now.
DominikDUK
Well-known
Merci for the link and I agree.
They know who the third one (driver) is. Mourad Hamyd who went to the police has apparently a very good alibi he was at school during the attack.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
I think this sums up one perspective on this matter:
http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/20...-speech-does-not-mean-freedom-from-criticism/
Cheers,
Dave
http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/20...-speech-does-not-mean-freedom-from-criticism/
Cheers,
Dave
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Just an unholy war on Palestinians, true.
Thing is, if someone crosses the border of free speech and wanders off into racism, slanderous comments or calls for violence, you enter a debate. Or a legal trial.
But not a duel or an ambush.
For satiric comments and cartoons, anyone and anything is game imho. Presidents, saints, religions, politicians, movie stars, whathaveyou.
Sticks n stones may break my bones Love, as Capt. Jack Sparrow said.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
What both the terrorists and rightwing extremists want is a war of cultures or religion since it will weaken society and strenghten their power-lusting grip on the world.
Unity between all races, religions, nationalities AND THE ABSENCE OF FEAR is what beats the attackers into retreat!
DominikDUK
Well-known
Then they have reached their goals have they not, Patriot act, Guantanamo, Pegida, NSA snooping, Anti terror laws in many EU countries, diminished freedom of speech in many EU countries, etc...etc...
"Unity between all races, religions, nationalities AND THE ABSENCE OF FEAR is what beats the attackers into retreat! " really hope to see that one day we are after all one species with some minuscule differences that don't matter.