Welp, enjoy life surrounded by 20 bodyguards and sleeping in fortified bunkers, guys.

We'll also have to figure out how their humongous brass balls will fit through the door.

Tatsuma: Welp, enjoy life surrounded by 20 bodyguards and sleeping in fortified bunkers, guys.

That.

Talk about taunting the dynamite monkeys.

Oh and Charlie Hebdo attacks everyone.

'We have to veil Charlie Hebdo'

'G-d doesn't exist' 'YES, HE DOES!'

'New wave of anti-semitism, Charlie Hebdo fires all its Jews'
'Get out, yids!' 'You'll go down in value without us!'

This is not a question of sticking it to Muslims but complaining when it's done to Jews, if some idiots wants to pretend it's the case. This is purely a question of freedom of expression.

I might hate what they have to say, but I will defend to death their right to say it.

I would have gone with making Muhammad a suicide bomber or farking a 10 year old, but that works too.

Keep up the good work Charlie.

Cars packed with explosives have just set out from points all over europe headed for the home of each and every staff member on that magazine.

Tatsuma: Oh and Charlie Hebdo attacks everyone.
[img162.imageshack.us image 302x416]
'We have to veil Charlie Hebdo'
[hurryupharry.org image 389x400]
'G-d doesn't exist' 'YES, HE DOES!'
[www.le-livre.fr image 400x468]
'New wave of anti-semitism, Charlie Hebdo fires all its Jews'
'Get out, yids!' 'You'll go down in value without us!'

This is not a question of sticking it to Muslims but complaining when it's done to Jews, if some idiots wants to pretend it's the case. This is purely a question of freedom of expression.

I might hate what they have to say, but I will defend to death their right to say it.

Is that last panel you posted sacrilegious? I'm genuinely curious, as showing the Prophet's face is pretty much the height of sacrilege. What would be the equivalent in Judaism or Christianity?

The last panel? About firing Jews? Are you asking whether showing Jews losing money is blasphemous in Judaism?

Because yes it is

coco ebert: Is that last panel you posted sacrilegious? I'm genuinely curious, as showing the Prophet's face is pretty much the height of sacrilege. What would be the equivalent in Judaism or Christianity?

The Second Commandment.

Oh snap! And who said the French didn't have balls?

You know, it's weird. I'm not religious, though my background is Muslim and I was raised around Muslim traditions. I also like irreverence and satire, so I should like this type of thing, but somehow it comes across to me as Islamaphobic. I'm not flaming or trolling, I genuinely wonder why I think that. For instance, if this were done in Turkey where I'm from I'd view it more positively as it would be a critique of the dominant culture's religiosity, but when it's done to a minority population it seems to have a different implication. Does that make sense to people? It's like if a major publication in the U.S. came out with a cover depicting something horribly offensive to Mexican-Americans (for example an editorial with anchor babies dropping everywhere). Clearly I support their right to do it, though. I guess what I'm saying is it's not that I'm offended but that I am cognizant of how minority populations feel in countries where the majority seems to hate them.

/end rambling

coco ebert: You know, it's weird. I'm not religious, though my background is Muslim and I was raised around Muslim traditions. I also like irreverence and satire, so I should like this type of thing, but somehow it comes across to me as Islamaphobic. I'm not flaming or trolling, I genuinely wonder why I think that. For instance, if this were done in Turkey where I'm from I'd view it more positively as it would be a critique of the dominant culture's religiosity, but when it's done to a minority population it seems to have a different implication. Does that make sense to people? It's like if a major publication in the U.S. came out with a cover depicting something horribly offensive to Mexican-Americans (for example an editorial with anchor babies dropping everywhere). Clearly I support their right to do it, though. I guess what I'm saying is it's not that I'm offended but that I am cognizant of how minority populations feel in countries where the majority seems to hate them.

You simply don't understand French secularism, especially from the areligious press.

They will attack each and every religion, just because it's a minority (a Muslims are certainly a sizeable and heard minority) will not stop them. They attack everyone with the same zeal.

If you look at the images I posted, they have no qualms going after Jews or Xians.

This is deeply embedded in French culture and psyche. It's always been. Just read some Voltaire.

coco ebert: What would be the equivalent in Judaism or Christianity?

I think saying "God doesn't exist" would be pretty far up there.

I started out with a gut feeling that it was basically wrong to publish anything intentionally deriding someone's religion (back when the Danish cartoon thing happened). But I'm long since over that. Fark anyone who wants to tell me what I can and can't say or publish. It's a basic human right. If some assholes want to respond to that with violence, they should be dealt with harshly.

coco ebert: You know, it's weird. I'm not religious, though my background is Muslim and I was raised around Muslim traditions. I also like irreverence and satire, so I should like this type of thing, but somehow it comes across to me as Islamaphobic

How so? Islam is generally homophobic. Poking fun at that stance is not Islamaphobic.

Tatsuma: The last panel? About firing Jews? Are you asking whether showing Jews losing money is blasphemous in Judaism?

Because yes it is

Do you think something equally offensive to Jews would be the magazine depicting the Vichy regime in a positive light, for instance? I know it's not directly paralleled religiously with this instance, but I'm wondering if something like that would provoke equal outrage.

Btw, I read Turkish newspapers pretty regularly and I haven't seen any reporting on this. It might be upsetting to Hebdo if there isn't more outrage. :)

Tatsuma: You simply don't understand French secularism, especially from the areligious press.

They will attack each and every religion, just because it's a minority (a Muslims are certainly a sizeable and heard minority) will not stop them. They attack everyone with the same zeal.

If you look at the images I posted, they have no qualms going after Jews or Xians.

This is deeply embedded in French culture and psyche. It's always been. Just read some Voltaire.

Oh, I've studied French laicism (Turkish secularism is based on it), so I know attitudes towards religions are like that there. I also know though that crosses and skullcaps were only outlawed in public schools after head scarves were, so one could argue that Islam is today a more hated religion than others there.

coco ebert: Do you think something equally offensive to Jews would be the magazine depicting the Vichy regime in a positive light, for instance?

... Are you seriously asking whether that a cover with Mohammed making out with a man would be the same as mocking Jews being rounded and sent to concentration camps, or shot in the head on the spot when discovered, without mentioning the thefts, rapes and other things that were going on at the time?

coco ebert: I also know though that crosses and skullcaps were only outlawed in public schools after head scarves were

This is blatantly false. Kippot have been banned for public servants and in classroom for years now, decades even.

The father of a Rabbi I know, who teaches in a French University, has been forced to wear a toupee (as a head covering) because he couldn't wear a kippah in class.

It's not like they went after Muslims and thought 'welp, let's go after the Jews to hide the fact we hate Muslims'

Tatsuma: coco ebert: I also know though that crosses and skullcaps were only outlawed in public schools after head scarves were

This is blatantly false. Kippot have been banned for public servants and in classroom for years now, decades even.

The father of a Rabbi I know, who teaches in a French University, has been forced to wear a toupee (as a head covering) because he couldn't wear a kippah in class.

It's not like they went after Muslims and thought 'welp, let's go after the Jews to hide the fact we hate Muslims'

I'm referring to primary and secondary school. From Wikipedia:

The French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools bans wearing conspicuous religious symbols in French public (i.e. government-operated) primary and secondary schools. The law is an amendment to the French Code of Education that expands principles founded in existing French law, especially the constitutional requirement of laïcité: the separation of state and religious activities.

The bill passed France's national legislature and was signed into law by President Jacques Chirac on 15 March 2004 (thus the technical name is law 2004-228 of 15 March 2004) and came into effect on 2 September 2004, at the beginning of the new school year. The full title of the law is Loi n° 2004-228 du 15 mars 2004 encadrant, en application du principe de laïcité, le port de signes ou de tenues manifestant une appartenance religieuse dans les écoles, collèges et lycées publics (literally "Law #2004-228 of March 15, 2004 concerning, as an application of the principle of the separation of church and state, the wearing of symbols or garb which show religious affiliation in public primary and secondary schools").

The law does not mention any particular symbol, and thus bans all Christian (veil, signs), Muslim (veil, signs), and other minor religions' signs. But it is considered by many to specifically target the wearing of headscarves (a khimar, considered by most Muslims to be an obligatory article of faith as part of hijab ["modesty"]) by Muslim schoolgirls. For this reason, it is occasionally referred to as the French headscarf ban in the foreign press.

Tatsuma: ... Are you seriously asking whether that a cover with Mohammed making out with a man would be the same as mocking Jews being rounded and sent to concentration camps, or shot in the head on the spot when discovered, without mentioning the thefts, rapes and other things that were going on at the time?

I don't view that as equivalent at all, I'm just wondering what the threshold of outrage would be. Though I don't share the sentiment, such an image is deeply, deeply offensive to some Muslims.

unlikely: Cars packed with explosives have just set out from points all over europe headed for the home of each and every staff member on that magazine.

that would be one way to get all the muslims removed from france.

abb3w: "Okay. So, ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking, yeah?"

we have a winner. close the thread please.

downstairs: coco ebert: You know, it's weird. I'm not religious, though my background is Muslim and I was raised around Muslim traditions. I also like irreverence and satire, so I should like this type of thing, but somehow it comes across to me as Islamaphobic

How so? Islam is generally homophobic. Poking fun at that stance is not Islamaphobic.

Fair enough. Although I would argue practices vary in actual countries (I know a lot of actively gay Turkish and Arab people), I don't think it's wrong to say that devout practitioners generally tend to be homophobic.

coco ebert: I also like irreverence and satire, so I should like this type of thing, but somehow it comes across to me as Islamaphobic.

I don't think exposing Islamic intolerance is Islamaphobic. It is trolling Islam. How the Muslim world responds to this is the whole point.

coco ebert: I'm referring to primary and secondary school. From Wikipedia:

Except that you were still wrong, it immediately banned all religious symbols, not Muslim ones specifically then the others later.

coco ebert: I don't view that as equivalent at all, I'm just wondering what the threshold of outrage would be. Though I don't share the sentiment, such an image is deeply, deeply offensive to some Muslims.

Yeah we shrug our shoulders and move on.

After the last 2,000 years of History, do you think we really care about cartoons?

Heck in response to an Iranian Holocaust denial cartoon contest, Israelis decided to hold one as well with the participation of American Jews.

violentsalvation: coco ebert: I also like irreverence and satire, so I should like this type of thing, but somehow it comes across to me as Islamaphobic.

I don't think exposing Islamic intolerance is Islamaphobic. It is trolling Islam. How the Muslim world responds to this is the whole point.

Yep. I hate to say it. But if it depicted the editor making out with Jesus, there would be no controversy; no one would even notice.

violentsalvation: coco ebert: I also like irreverence and satire, so I should like this type of thing, but somehow it comes across to me as Islamaphobic.

I don't think exposing Islamic intolerance is Islamaphobic. It is trolling Islam. How the Muslim world responds to this is the whole point.

I don't see beliefs about iconography (which Protestants have as well along with other faiths) as intolerant. I agree with you that how people respond is key, but for the most part, the vast majority of Muslims just shake their heads, sigh, and move on. That's what my relatives do when they see such images and so do millions of other Muslims (if they even see these images). I think one could argue that many of these publications display a deep unease with the Muslim populations in their own European countries, and fears about changing demographics.

Maybe it's my research history of looking into Islam and Europe that indicates to me that this is more about contemporary France than it is about the Muslim world.

gilgigamesh: Yep. I hate to say it. But if it depicted the editor making out with Jesus, there would be no controversy; no one would even notice.

I don't know. What about all the controversy over the play Corpus Christi? Hell, it continues to this day.

Tatsuma: Except that you were still wrong, it immediately banned all religious symbols, not Muslim ones specifically then the others later.

Yes, you're right. In my mind it was one law but the way I wrote it seemed as though there were separate ones. What I meant was that many thought it was proposed because of the increase in headscarf use.

Tatsuma: Yeah we shrug our shoulders and move on.

After the last 2,000 years of History, do you think we really care about cartoons?

Heck in response to an Iranian Holocaust denial cartoon contest, Israelis decided to hold one as well with the participation of American Jews.

Lol, I agree that a cartoon is just a cartoon. Good on the American Jews for responding that way. Meet irreverence with irreverence.

coco ebert: Good on the American Jews for responding that way. Meet irreverence with irreverence.

Er, and Israelis as well.

RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: Yep. I hate to say it. But if it depicted the editor making out with Jesus, there would be no controversy; no one would even notice.

I don't know. What about all the controversy over the play Corpus Christi? Hell, it continues to this day.

OK then, let me refine my point:

But if it depicted the editor making out with Jesus, there would be no controversy fire bombings

coco ebert: I don't view that as equivalent at all, I'm just wondering what the threshold of outrage would be. Though I don't share the sentiment, such an image is deeply, deeply offensive to some Muslims.

I don't know if there is one. As a (former) Catholic, I can't speak for Jews, but some people were pretty pissed off (ha!) at Serrano's image of a crucifix submerged in urine (pops). Death threats to the artist, vandalism, etc.

Good!

If you make your voice heard through violence like the bombers, you don't deserve to be heard except that we may all do the opposite of your will.

Also, if they catch the bomber, they should be hung, drawn, and quartered. Firebombing is NOT COOL. And I'm a pyro. I know the allure of dancing flames kissing the night sky. Arsonists ruin it for all of us.

RodneyToady: coco ebert: I don't view that as equivalent at all, I'm just wondering what the threshold of outrage would be. Though I don't share the sentiment, such an image is deeply, deeply offensive to some Muslims.

I don't know if there is one. As a (former) Catholic, I can't speak for Jews, but some people were pretty pissed off (ha!) at Serrano's image of a crucifix submerged in urine (pops). Death threats to the artist, vandalism, etc.

Wasn't there also something with Giuliani and threats to cut off public support to an artist that depicted Mary with elephant dung or something? I may be remembering wrong.

coco ebert: I don't view that as equivalent at all, I'm just wondering what the threshold of outrage would be. Though I don't share the sentiment, such an image is deeply, deeply offensive to some Muslims.

Well the muslim destruction of the buddhist statues in afghanistan and the muslim treatment of women worldwide is DEEPLY, DEEPLY offensive to most humans.

If you dont want to be offended, it is probably useful if you dont offend others first.
Just a suggestion.

/should the number of people who are offended matter? where do you draw the line in free speech? targets over peoples faces? calls to kill people who offended you?

gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: Yep. I hate to say it. But if it depicted the editor making out with Jesus, there would be no controversy; no one would even notice.

I don't know. What about all the controversy over the play Corpus Christi? Hell, it continues to this day.

OK then, let me refine my point:

But if it depicted the editor making out with Jesus, there would be no controversy fire bombings

Didn't the playwright get death threats? Maybe not on the level of a fire bombing, but surely only a slight step down from it.

namatad: coco ebert: I don't view that as equivalent at all, I'm just wondering what the threshold of outrage would be. Though I don't share the sentiment, such an image is deeply, deeply offensive to some Muslims.

Well the muslim destruction of the buddhist statues in afghanistan and the muslim treatment of women worldwide is DEEPLY, DEEPLY offensive to most humans.

If you dont want to be offended, it is probably useful if you dont offend others first.
Just a suggestion.

/should the number of people who are offended matter? where do you draw the line in free speech? targets over peoples faces? calls to kill people who offended you?

I don't believe in censorship of images like this. And yes, the destruction of the Buddha temples were deeply offensive to me as well. I'm not sure what "Muslim treatment of women" refers to, however.

My point was more about the intentionality of the editors. Clearly it's to provoke, and that I defend as free speech. I am allowed to be disheartened by it, though, aren't I?

RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: Yep. I hate to say it. But if it depicted the editor making out with Jesus, there would be no controversy; no one would even notice.

I don't know. What about all the controversy over the play Corpus Christi? Hell, it continues to this day.

OK then, let me refine my point:

But if it depicted the editor making out with Jesus, there would be no controversy fire bombings

Didn't the playwright get death threats? Maybe not on the level of a fire bombing, but surely only a slight step down from it.

Not to mention that these people don't always fail to follow through. Remember the guy who shot up the Episcopalian Church by me a few years ago because he hated liberals and gays.

RexTalionis: Didn't the playwright get death threats? Maybe not on the level of a fire bombing, but surely only a slight step down from it.

I know I am going against Fark orthodoxy here of everyone being an expert on everything, but I am going to just go ahead and confess that I have no idea what you are referring to.

GAT_00: Not to mention that these people don't always fail to follow through. Remember the guy who shot up the Episcopalian Church by me a few years ago because he hated liberals and gays.

Also, in those cases, people are attacking the dominant culture of Christianity in the U.S. That's what I meant up-thread by being more receptive to this if it had occurred in a Muslim country as it would be a critique of the dominant perspective in that society. Yet Islam is the minority culture in France and therefore a critique of it is reacted to differently. I don't know if that makes any sense, I'm just musing anyhow...

gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: Didn't the playwright get death threats? Maybe not on the level of a fire bombing, but surely only a slight step down from it.

I know I am going against Fark orthodoxy here of everyone being an expert on everything, but I am going to just go ahead and confess that I have no idea what you are referring to.

Corpus Christi was a play about Jesus and his Apostles as gay men in Texas. The playwright got a lot of criticism and death threats in, I think '99, when it was released and every time it's performed, it garners more controversy or threats.

I kind of wish this thread weren't going green, because I'm going to get so much sh*t.

RexTalionis: Corpus Christi was a play about Jesus and his Apostles as gay men in Texas. The playwright got a lot of criticism and death threats in, I think '99, when it was released and every time it's performed, it garners more controversy or threats.

Ah, ok.

I think that is probably a false dichotomy because you are talking about the US. Yes, here Christian extremism is more of a problem than Islamic extremism, but that is partly cultural and mainly numerical: Muslims are about 2% of the population and Christians 85 or 90%, so of course you are going to have more Christian violent fanatics.

France (and Europe generally) is a different matter. The culture is largely secular, and Christian violent extremism is essentially nonexistent. Muslims, however.... well, let's just say they can't have public trash bins in Paris anymore because they kept exploding.

gilgigamesh: let's just say they can't have public trash bins in Paris anymore because they kept exploding.

And to pre-empt some wag coming in to tell me I am full of shiat, your citation:



/GIS for "Paris trash bin"

gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: Corpus Christi was a play about Jesus and his Apostles as gay men in Texas. The playwright got a lot of criticism and death threats in, I think '99, when it was released and every time it's performed, it garners more controversy or threats.

Ah, ok.

I think that is probably a false dichotomy because you are talking about the US. Yes, here Christian extremism is more of a problem than Islamic extremism, but that is partly cultural and mainly numerical: Muslims are about 2% of the population and Christians 85 or 90%, so of course you are going to have more Christian violent fanatics.

France (and Europe generally) is a different matter. The culture is largely secular, and Christian violent extremism is essentially nonexistent. Muslims, however.... well, let's just say they can't have public trash bins in Paris anymore because they kept exploding.

Didn't a mob of 1000 French anti-blasphemy Christian fundamentalists march through Avignon earlier this year and mobbed the gallery where Andrew Serrano's "Piss Christ" was hanging and destroyed it with hammers and icepicks?

coco ebert: My point was more about the intentionality of the editors. Clearly it's to provoke, and that I defend as free speech. I am allowed to be disheartened by it, though, aren't I?

of course!

I have been a recovered ex-catholic for over 30 years now. yet, when tards use the words papists or rip roman catholics I am still strangely offended. "really? you think it is ok to rip on a billion people? just because you were raised by lutherans?"

the brain washing goes deep. no matter how long you have been away nor how far you have gone.

equality (new window)
Funny how it has become easy for westerners to point out the cultural flaws in others, now that we have less of them. How long ago were women in the US prevented from working or voting or being in the company of strange men?

RexTalionis: Didn't a mob of 1000 French anti-blasphemy Christian fundamentalists march through Avignon earlier this year and mobbed the gallery where Andrew Serrano's "Piss Christ" was hanging and destroyed it with hammers and icepicks?

Sorry, the mob didn't destroy it. A small group of Christian fundamentalists did the day after the march.

Tatsuma: [4.bp.blogspot.com

image 590x626]

Welp, enjoy life surrounded by 20 bodyguards and sleeping in fortified bunkers, guys.

We'll also have to figure out how their humongous brass balls will fit through the door.

Maybe that the Islamic extremists will eventually figure out that firebombing the newspaper offices will only make the irreverence worse.