Support NeoGAF

[Skyzard]

That's not what they claim

I'm trying to find an official statement but all I could find was secondary sources.

I'm not sure how big the Boston Globe is, but here's their official stance on the issue:

New York Times:

Ultimately, he decided against it, he said, because he had to consider foremost the sensibilities of Times readers, especially its Muslim readers. To many of them, he said, depictions of the prophet Muhammad are sacrilegious; those that are meant to mock even more so. “We have a standard that is long held and that serves us well: that there is a line between gratuitous insult and satire. Most of these are gratuitous insult.”

.

 

[ASIS]

Do you think they were wrong to print those cartoons? Answer the question, please.

I can only speak for myself, but yes i think it's wrong. I think it's wrong to make fun of beliefs in general. But I don't think death, or any sort of punishment is a justifiable consequence physical or emotional, mental, or any kind of punishment you could think of.

Personally, I just stay away from these kinds of things.

 

[Mailenstein]

The problem are not the satirical cartoons, but the mindset some people in this world carry. It absolutely doesn't matter how far and how much they are pushing it, because small minded people will always find something which is offending them. I saw a post earlier in this thread (or in the previous one) where somebody said that for some people insulting the prophet equals to insulting somebody's mother. While that is true, it does't really matter. I would't care, because I know better. You can't let small minded people get the upper hand. They need to learn to deal with it, to understand what the message in satirical cartoons really is and improve from there. Islam is still a very young religion compared to christianity. I just wish that "real" muslim people would be more vocal about it.

 

[DrForester]

Do I think they were wrong to spew hatred and heavily offend a billion people?

Is that really surprising?

People have the right to be assholes and print stuff that has no purpose other than to piss people off.

But fuck anyone who thinks they deserve to die for being assholes.

 

[Nephtis]

People have the right to be assholes and print stuff that has no purpose other than to piss people off.

But fuck anyone who thinks they deserve to die for being assholes.

Who has said their deaths were deserved?

 

[Seventy70]

They had every right to make those cartoons, but whether they should have is another thing. That said, I don't think they should have died over this.

Could I walk around cursing at everybody? Absolutely. Whether I should is another story. I can't really think of anything good that has come out of those cartoons.

 

[FStop7]

I saw several people wearing "Je Suis Charlie" signs yesterday while traveling through airports. I didn't know they were related to the attacks until after. I wish I had gotten some photos of them, in hindsight it was a very moving thing to see.

 

[Scoot McNairy]

I do wish Sky News would stop with obsessing over the history of the Je Suis Charlie hashtag, and over who tweeted it first, and who tweeted the first picture, and lets have an interview with the man who invented it, and what were his thoughts when he came up with the idea. This is the kind of crap that The Newsroom took the piss out of.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Vice: How the Far-Right and Conservatives of Europe Reacted to the Charlie Hebdo Massacre

I'm reading this article. Anyone else notice the link for "Danish People's Party" (gee, reminiscent of North Korea much?) links to apple.com?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

New York Times:


.

Deliberately provoking is much different than your statement they serve "no puropse but to offend". They're not equivalent.

They express a political opinion and idea they aren't they same as just calling someone fat for no reason.

 

[Shmuppers]

Don't the helicopters have heat seaking vision to find people hiding? I know if they're in a cave or under some shelter it won't help, but eventually they will have to move position to get more supplies.

From their movements after the incident, I don't think they planned this route out. I don't think they expected to get away - if they had, they certainly wouldn't have gone and got out the car to kill the policeman, driven up a motorway and then back round the other way etc. Maybe they had a 'safehouse' in mind though in case they did escape alive - but it definitely wouldn't have been a safehouse in a forest near Paris, where it would just be a matter of time before they were caught.

How do we know for sure that they're in the forest? The police must have some more info than they're releasing...

There are certainly lots of things we can't know at this point, regarding their plans. Don't give them too much credit; I think they've displayed enough incompetence to discount any viable plan of escape, other than "lets run into the woods". We'll see as events unfold.

 

[DY_nasty]

Same reason why it took days to find Christopher Dorner. They're in the woods.

So they've got horses?

 

[Scoot McNairy]

Could I walk around cursing at everybody? Absolutely. Whether I should is another story.

The problem is that this sounds like you're saying that publishing their magazine was tantamount to 'cursing at everyone'.

I don't think Charlie Hebdo were being douchebags. They weren't dancing around outside mosques throwing pork at families. They weren't throwing burning korans into peoples houses. They made a satirical magazine which made fun of loads of things, particularly things which other people were too afraid to make fun of and which really needed making fun of.

They weren't douchebags going around cursing at everyone.

 

[Scoot McNairy]

I think it's wrong to make fun of beliefs in general.

Is it wrong to make fun of the beliefs of racists? What about homophobes? What about scientologists? What about people who believe in homeopathy? What about people who think comic sans is a good font?

I dunno, dude. I think you need to have a think.

 

[Shmuppers]

The problem is that this sounds like you're saying that publishing their magazine was tantamount to 'cursing at everyone'.

I don't think Charlie Hebdo were being douchebags. They weren't dancing around outside mosques throwing pork at families. They weren't throwing burning korans into peoples houses. They made a satirical magazine which made fun of loads of things, particularly things which other people were too afraid to make fun of and which really needed making fun of.

They weren't douchebags going around cursing at everyone.

^^

And even if they were, the correct response wouldn't be to blow them away.

 

[TheStruggler]

As a muslim I would like to apologize for the events that happened in Paris. This is NOT what I believe in.

Dont even the majority like you who are good muslims and live their daily lives working supporting their families etc arent the problem you dont need to apologize for misguided morons like this

 

[ASIS]

Is it wrong to make fun of the beliefs of racists? What about homophobes? What about scientologists? What about people who believe in homeopathy? What about people who think comic sans is a good font?

I dunno, dude. I think you need to have a think.

I think it's kind of obvious that I meant spiritual beliefs. Any and all of the things you listed is fine.

Although I don't know what a scientologist is. Is it a belief in science?

Dont even the majority like you who are good muslims and live their daily lives working supporting their families etc arent the problem you dont need to apologize for misguided morons like this

But I do, I'm sick and tired of my religion being dragged to the mud because of morons. There has been much pain and suffering over personal views and I feel like I need to do something about it. An apology may not be much, but if more muslims do it it will at least make them feel more responsible over their beliefs and do something about it.

 

[Psychotext]

I think it's kind of obvious that I meant spiritual beliefs. Any and all of the things you listed is fine.

Although I don't know what a scientologist is. Is it a belief in science?

No, it's a religion... and all religions are fair game, because all religions are ultimately defined by human interpretation / inventiveness, and thus are open to criticism, and, if necessary, ridicule.

 

[Scoot McNairy]

^^

And even if they were, the correct response wouldn't be to blow them away.

Yep.

I really can't think of an example of anything similar to this ever happening. These guys literally tried to extinguish the magazine from existence by destroying the editorial team. It's unprecedented in the western world, I think.

I hope that sentences for terrorist offences become considerably more severe, though. It looks like at least one of these guys was on a number of lists and previously convicted of terrorist offences and then released into the wild without being monitored.

 

[SapientWolf]

I can only speak for myself, but yes i think it's wrong. I think it's wrong to make fun of beliefs in general. But I don't think death, or any sort of punishment is a justifiable consequence physical or emotional, mental, or any kind of punishment you could think of.

Personally, I just stay away from these kinds of things.

In my opinion, not only is it not wrong, it's also necessary, because anything that cannot be made fun of also cannot be criticized. And anything that cannot be criticized is dangerous.

 

[Toxi]

My co-workers are still talking about this. These mass shootings feel like such a horrendously common event nowadays, and yet it's still disturbing and tragic each time it happens. Good luck to those grieving.

 

[ASIS]

No, it's a religion... and all religions are fair game, because all religions are ultimately defined by human interpretation / inventiveness, and thus are open to criticism, and, if necessary, ridicule.

Just googled it, seems quite nice. So no, I don't think it's fine to make fun of them. Even if they know what they believe in is fantastical.

In my opinion, not only is it not wrong, it's also necessary, because anything that cannot be made fun of also cannot be criticized. And anything that cannot be criticized is dangerous.

Criticism is fine, and is even encouraged. But ridicule does not do anything but offend. I just don't see the point of it. And I strongly believe that you can criticize an opinion while also respecting those who hold it.

 

[Qblivion]

In my opinion, not only is it not wrong, it's also necessary, because anything that cannot be made fun of also cannot be criticized. And anything that cannot be criticized is dangerous.

Where does this attitude come from that humor is some holy grail of expression that can never be touched?

Criticism is a good thing.

Being crude and mean about minorities isn't.

 

[Shmuppers]

Where does this attitude come from that humor is some holy grail of expression that can never be touched?

Criticism is a good thing.

Being crude and mean about minorities isn't.

Well, Islam isn't exactly a minority.

 

[Qblivion]

Well, Islam isn't exactly a minority.

In the white, industrial western world it is.

 

[SapientWolf]

Just googled it, seems quite nice. So no, I don't think it's fine to make fun of them. Even if they know what they believe in is fantastical.


Criticism is fine, and is even encouraged. But ridicule does not do anything but offend. I just don't see the point of it. And I strongly believe that you can criticize an opinion while also respecting those who hold it.

Again, I disagree. Satire and lampooning are valid, and often effective, forms of criticism, IMO. Although they're something of a lost art these days.

 

[Shmuppers]

In the white, industrial western world it is.

You're right, but this story's scope is much broader than the western world.

 

[ASIS]

Again, I disagree. Satire and lampooning are valid, and often effective, forms of criticism, IMO. Although they're something of a lost art these days.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, there's nothing I can add to this discussion.

 

[Mailenstein]

Criticism is fine, and is even encouraged. But ridicule does not do anything but offend. I just don't see the point of it. And I strongly believe that you can criticize an opinion while also respecting those who hold it.

And that's the problem we're are dealing with here. People need to learn to read between the lines and understand the message instead of being flat out offended.

 

[Toxi]

When people talk about censorship, this is what they should talk about. People were murdered for their creative expression. Words should be fought with words; only cowards unable to do this stoop to violence to silence their opponents.

 

[Seventy70]

And that's the problem we're are dealing with here. People need to learn to read between the lines and understand the message instead of being flat out offended.

What if they understand the message just fine, but think that the way it's delivered is way too hostile and uncalled for. It's not like anyone who is a Muslim would read Charlie Hebdo and say, "You know what, I'm going to stop being a Muslim."

 

[DrForester]

Sean Hannity vs. Anjem Choudary

I don't know who to root for...

edit: I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

 

[vpance]

In my opinion, not only is it not wrong, it's also necessary, because anything that cannot be made fun of also cannot be criticized. And anything that cannot be criticized is dangerous.

This is true. However, even the cartoonists themselves accepted the kind of repercussions that were possible. They were practically poking a pit bull with a stick repeatedly, with what they were publishing. These guys were truly martyrs in every sense of the word.

Muslim extremists might as well be a violent alien race. There's just no way we can understand why they're willing to do what they do and why. It's too bad we have to live on the same planet as them.

 

[Seventy70]

This is true. However, even the cartoonists themselves accepted the kind of repercussions that were possible. They were practically poking a pit bull with a stick repeatedly, with what they were publishing. These guys were truly martyrs in every sense of the word.

Muslim extremists might as well be a violent alien race. There's just no way we can understand why they're willing to do what they do and why. It's too bad we have to live on the same planet as them.

If I went out, poked at a pit bull with a stick and died, would you call me a martyr?

 

[vpance]

If I went out, poked at a pit bull with a stick and died, would you call me a martyr?

No, because you would be doing it for nothing. They were doing it for freedom of the press.

 

[Laughing Banana]

Do you think they were wrong to print those cartoons? Answer the question, please.

They're not "wrong" to do it, although I do think those cartoons of theirs are puerile, juvenile piece of crap.

Am I allowed to say that without people accusing me as being happy to what happened to them?

 

[PopeReal]

If I went out, poked at a pit bull with a stick and died, would you call me a martyr?

I would call you dumb. But what does that have to do with drawing cartoons?

 

[RustyNails]

Do you think they were wrong to print those cartoons? Answer the question, please.

I hate how Muslims are questioned by people WHERE DO YOU STAND ON CARTOONS ANSWER NOW SCUM like its fucking East Germany in the 80's.

 

[yogloo]

If I went out, poked at a pit bull with a stick and died, would you call me a martyr?

If you draw a cartoon of the pitbull then died I would call you a martyr.

 

[Lime]

You're right, but this story's scope is much broader than the western world.

No, it is also about Muslims in the Western world, especially in Europe where Islamophobia and racism are rampant. Qblivion's point still stands

 

[Toxi]

If I went out, poked at a pit bull with a stick and died, would you call me a martyr?

What the fuck?

Poking a dog is messing with a dangerous animal that has none of the morals that make us human. The folks at Charlie Hebdo actually expected the people offended by the comics to actually hold themselves to decent human standards. And these two gunmen sadly defied that expectation.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I hate how Muslims are questioned by people WHERE DO YOU STAND ON CARTOONS ANSWER NOW SCUM like its fucking East Germany in the 80's.

On an individual level, of course it's a bit ridiculous, but a bunch of people were just killed over cartoons that poked fun and Islam, so I think it's a fair question.

 

[Lime]

Where does this attitude come from that humor is some holy grail of expression that can never be touched?

Criticism is a good thing.

Being crude and mean about minorities isn't.

Theyre the same reactions when crude rape jokes are criticized. People think that criticism or disapproval of such jokes are a form of censorship. The difference is though that these cases are really tough to discuss because sick individuals murder the creators, so the conversation gets muddy and emotional and we end up talking about the core principle of freedom of speech, rather than paying respect to oppressed minority groups.

 

[nilbog21]

Yeah Charlie hebdo was deliberately making a stand in support of free speech rather than try to provoke Islamists. I don't think a lot of people get that and only see CH as Islam bathers..

Very disappointed by the statement made by NYT, making me consider unsubscribing.

 

[Sun Bather]

If I went out, poked at a pit bull with a stick and died, would you call me a martyr?

That is a bad analogue.

 

[vpance]

What the fuck?

Poking a dog is messing with a dangerous animal. The folks at Charlie Hebdo actually expected the people offended by the comics to actually hold themselves to decent human standards. And these two gunmen sadly defied that expectation.

In the very least, I think they expected violence or vandalism, having hired security after getting fire bombed. Maybe one of the cartoonists was speaking figuratively though when he said he'd "rather die than live like a rat". Or not? Clearly they expected something though.

 

[Mailenstein]

What if they understand the message just fine, but think that the way it's delivered is way too hostile and uncalled for. It's not like anyone who is a Muslim would read Charlie Hebdo and say, "You know what, I'm going to stop being a Muslim."

Then that person seem not to understand how satire works in general and that it is intentionally a way of over the top criticism. Nobody ask anyone to stop believing in something, but people need to stop thinking their religion is perfect and can't be improved. I wish those people themselves would criticize/question their religion/faith way more.

 

[Jintor]

Just googled it, seems quite nice. So no, I don't think it's fine to make fun of them. Even if they know what they believe in is fantastical.

You should probably improve your google skills because even a cursory search would show that Scientology was started by a science-fiction writer as a scam.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

You should probably improve your google skills because even a cursory search would show that Scientology was started by a science-fiction writer as a scam.

I really don't see how that's relevant, honestly. All religions started out because one person or group of people wanted to use stories to influence other people.

 

[TelemachusD]

Yeah Charlie hebdo was deliberately making a stand in support of free speech rather than try to provoke Islamists. I don't think a lot of people get that and only see CH as Islam bathers..

Very disappointed by the statement made by NYT, making me consider unsubscribing.

Islam was clearly not their only target. The stakes when satirizing Christianity are generally a lot lower though.

Semi-NSFW Charlie Hebdo cover.