Charlie Hebdo's First Post-Massacre Cover

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by aaronvan, Jan 12, 2015.

  1. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #1
    Now these are some leftist's that I can get support. They may be wrong on economics but they are militant and courageous. One of their cartoonists said he vomits on all of their new hypocritical supporters. I wish our provocateurs were as fun as the Charlie Hebdo folks. They have more cojones than all American journalists combined.
     

    Attached Files:

    • -2.png
      -2.png
      File size:
      280.5 KB
      Views:
      57
  2. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #2
    The telling lack in this, which is why the bold text, is that we EXPECT, as well as INVITE our cartoonists and satirists to do something like this. We're used to it, thanks to the 1st Amendment granting freedom of the press, as well as of speech to mock a religion or any political figure we see fit in our country.

    While France does have similar laws, it isn't entirely codified and sticking out like a sore thumb in the main document that establishes their government.

    Should I venture to say that you are surprised by this, because we are so used to it happening in the US?

    BL.
     
  3. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #3
    Not at all. I don't think American satirists are nearly as bold. Maybe on the Web, but not in a popular print journal with a three million circulation. Hell, most American news outlets won't even print Hebdo's cartoons without blurring Mohammad's face, when they print them at all.

    Here is the NYT article on the new issue cover. The Times won't even print the damn cover which is the subject of the report!

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/13/arts/international/charlie-hebdo-staff-prepares-next-issue.html
     
  4. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #4
    I love France, as a nation and as a culture.

    But I'm not going to fool myself into thinking that French politics or journalism has much of anything to teach us Americans.

    The problem France has with Islam is one largely of its own making. A sizable immigrant and native-born Muslim community exists within France largely because of France's ill-considered Colonial policies at the end of the 19th century, and a tragically mishandled post-WWII period.

    The Charlie Hebdo tragedy didn't happen because of France's foreign policy, its support for Israel, or the broadcast of French TV shows and movies into conservative Arab nations. No: Charlie Hebdo happened because there are a couple of million disenfranchised young French muslims living in near slum-conditions in the suburbs of Paris and every other large city.

    When Charlie Hebdo publishes cartoons mocking Islamic fundamentalism, it is to a large degree punching down, making fun of the poorest, least advantaged members of French society.

    I'm all in favor of Free Speech. But lets not pretend that Charlie Hebdo's brand of satire is anything to be particularly proud of.
     
  5. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #5

    #IAmNotCharlie
     
  6. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #6
    Blaming the victims is an age-old method of deflection. However,

    #journalismsinotacrime
     
  7. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #7
    Yes, let's start throwing around cliches as a defense to irresponsible and childish behavior. :D

    No one said journalism was a crime. This is the equivalent to a "I know you are but what am I type of response."
     
  8. DUCKofD3ATH Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #8
    Your point would be valid if so many Western news organizations weren't practicing self-censorship like CNN:

    ‘Confirmed: Fear of terrorism is driving CNN’s editorial decisions’

    According to a story by CNNers Brian Stelter and Tom Kludt, Zucker opened an editorial meeting this morning with the following message: “‘Journalistically, every bone says we want to use and should use’ the cartoons, Zucker said. But ‘as managers, protecting and taking care of the safety of our employees around the world is more important right now.’”

    Which amounts to an admission that fear of terrorism is driving CNN’s editorial decisions….​

    Then there's the AP:

    Associated Press

    A statement from the Associated Press indicates that it is their policy not to publish Mohammad cartoons. “None of the images distributed by AP showed cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad,” a spokesman told The Daily Beast. “It’s been our policy for years that we refrain from moving deliberately provocative images.”

    And yet, many on Twitter noted that the AP was still selling images of “Piss Christ,” the anti-Christian piece of art depicting a crucifix dipped in urine. Shortly after the hypocrisy was pointed out, AP pulled that image as well.​

    And NBC, MSNBC and CNBC:

    Buzzfeed’s Rosie Gray reports that NBC News’ Group Standards team has instructed all three networks not to touch the photos.​

    Finally:

    The New York Times

    Via Buzzfeed’s Rosie Gray:

    NYT just sent me statement also saying they will not publish images of the Muhammad cartoons​

    There are many other examples here.
     
  9. iososx macrumors 6502a

    iososx

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2014
    Location:
    USA
    #9
    Edict in the USA for journalists, reporters, bloggers, or anyone with something to say, seems to be do nothing and act as though nothings occurred.

    Hiding might be a good idea as well :)
     
  10. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #10
    If you're going to continue with the right wing culture warrior gimmick perhaps try and make sure your sentences make sense.

    What exactly is this french satirical magazine's economic philosophy?
     
  11. kds1 Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #11
    Oh I think Charlie Hebdo's satire is great. And yes, I do think French politics has something to teach the U.S. - that of a completely secular state. The United States may talk like like it's completely secular, but it's not. We have
    "In God We Trust" on our money thanks to crazy right wing nuts like Joseph McCarthy, and "One nation, under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance thanks to the same. And we have wackos in Texas and Kansas that want to teach creationism. And politicians that cynically say "God Bless America" and "God Bless" and talk about God just to satisfy these religious nuts, because they think they have to or they won't get elected. It would be great to get an atheist president who wont cow-tow to the religious right. No, the Christian Taliban is alive and well in the U.S.A.

    ----------

    That's because United States journalists are pussies, and they are all giving in to terrorism. Pathetic. This is the land of "Freedom of Speech". Ha!
     
  12. DonJudgeMe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Location:
    Arizona
    #12
    Umm...Family Guy, American Dad, and South Park; Just off the top of my head. Not to mention hundreds, if not thousands, of American stand-up comedians do this every day. What country do you live in?

    These are actual full sitcom shows televised on basic cable, not just cartoon literature.
     
  13. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #13
    *Looks at the list of journalists killed in 2014. Scratches beard.*
     
  14. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #14
    A young Muslim woman can attend a public high school in Brooklyn, NY or McAllen, Texas and wear the hijab (headscarf) without raising an eyebrow. She can't do that anywhere in France.

    You can call that "completely secular" if you like. But I would look at that more as the result of a law designed specifically to discriminate against, and discourage, one religion - Islam.
     
  15. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #15
    if you can point out to the part of the koran where the hijab is mentioned i will believe that the islam is targeted.

    Which you can't. The islam only mentions "modest clothing" for .. you guessed it ... women _and_ men.

    Burquas, Hijab are more related with "putting women in their place". They are tools of discimination against women or else those muslim men would be wearing them as well.

    You know 100 years ago in smaller towns around here women without a headscarf and wearing their hair open without a knot were scandalous as well.And don't emeber the headcarf in the bible either.

    IMHO neither Hijab or Burqua have a place in a modern open society which is also concerned about gender equality. It's no coincidence that both headscarf and hats completly dissapeared out of western fashion during the 1960-1980 timeframe.

    Side fact:
    Wearing a hat inside a building was once considered bad manners. Even worse keeping your headwear on when talking to somebody. I learned that the hard way during my conscription service where regulation was obviously made up during the 1950ties.


    Also the resurgence of the headscarf,hijab, burqua in muslim countries is actually controlled by some local conservative (male) forces(*cough* Saudi Arabia *cough*) because looking at pictures from 1950-60 Western Turkey, Libanon, Persia, Egypt and even Afghanistan the number of women covering themselves is increasing.
     
  16. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #16
    And if you can tell me where in the Bible it mentions Christmas Trees or Easter Bunnies...

    The fact of the matter the hijab (as well as the Jewish kippah) doesn't present a security or health issue. It isn't sexually or racially provocative. It is simply banned in French schools in an effort to discourage the exercise of religion.

    With very few exceptions, the US Constitution protects our rights to practice our different religions freely. There is no such protection under French law.
     
  17. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #17
    How about the muslim women worldwide who choose to wear a hijab/burqa?

    Or do you not mention them because you've got an agenda you really need to get across ;)
     
  18. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #18
    And how many women stay with their husband who beat them ? an aweful lot. There is a name for that: Stockholm syndrome.

    if hijab burqa were essential explain to me why it wasn't essential 50 years ago in many countries in the middle east ? Weren't people muslim back then ?

    or i simply value women rights accomplisments more than medieval cultures like the kingdom of saudi arabia where importing a bible is forbidden, building a christian church is forbidden, driving cars as a woman is forbidden, death penalty for religious reason still exist, and somebody blogging critically about religous topics gets a 1000 whips flogging penalty.

    and thanks vrDrew for actually supporting my argument: neither eastern bunny or christmas tree (or carnival) are actually religious. They are _cultural_ traditions. Except those aren't diametral to gender equality.

    Burning infidels and heretics at the stake were once also cultural christians traditions. And those were also left behind.

    The Hijab and Burqa _are_ offensive to many Europeans, not "sexually or racially" but against core values of their society.

    Perhaps that is simply not understandable to americans, just like the nipplegate incident was not understandable to europeans
     
  19. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #19
    That is literally nothing to do with a muslim woman choosing to cover her face.

    Have you got any examples of where anyone is saying here is an essential part of muslim dress code? Its a choice, and granted yes sometimes it is an expectation for women to wear it, but there are also many muslim women who choose to wear it.



    So if the crux of the discussion is that you find the Hijab and Burqa's offensive. Why do you then feel that it gives you (a white male at a guess?) the right to protest against your perception that all muslim women who wear the burka are forced to do so by muslim men.... Additionally how dare you claim that you are standing up for womens rights by suggesting that they shouldn't be allowed to do something, where are the "Womens rights" in denying a woman the choice in whether she wants to adopt part of her cultural heritage.

    Thats right, I've got a view different to yours..... I must be american :rolleyes:

    The jist of your argument boils down to one thing..... you feel that you have the right to repress a woman from her choice because of your distaste for a cultural icon, under the guise of protecting her rights from the repression of muslim men....... So tell me exactly, where are the womens rights?

    Why muslim women choose to wear the veil

    There's a lot of people saying a lot of things on other peoples behalfs with regards to freedoms at the moment. Its a piss poor ill thought out kneejerk reaction.
     
  20. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #20
    I kinda agree that women wearing the Burqa are usually oppressed. However that isn't always the case.
     
  21. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #21
    I think it has validity, but I don't think its a common denominating factor of all women who wear the burqa.

    However banning the burqa is not and never will be a womens rights issue. Its an issue of one culture rejecting another culture.

    Males can't stand up for womens rights, by taking the choice away from women. That would infact spit in the face of all the achievements made in womens rights since the sufragettes.

    If you want to really help womens rights, then you make sure theres decent support networks for those who want to leave abusive relationships, for example, where a muslim man may force his wife to wear a hijab/niqab against her will. I know white Muslim convert women, who choose to wear hijabs, not because their husbands expect it, but because its an acknowledgement of the culture they've chosen to be a part of, that is their right.
     
  22. b0fh666 macrumors 6502a

    b0fh666

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    Location:
    south
    #22
    I disagree.

    If women want to wear burcas at their homes more power to them! but in schools it's a no-no.

    it could be a fricking killer uber-bot under those sheets, for crying out loud :D
     
  23. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    Could be a bomb in the kids school bag too.
     
  24. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #24
    would any of those for example converts/single cases explicitly speaking out for wearing one out of their own motivation at adult age have a problem with taking it off for a state job like teacher/policeman/doctor etc. ? my guess: no
    many of the majority who are coerced into wearing it from childhood on the other hand don't have the same self "view" and thus are hardly suprisingly not able to do that, and thus are absent from many federal jobs.

    banning face covering headwear for certain jobs is OK for certain jobs with lots of human interaction (teacher, at court, doctor, policemen), a general ban is obviously ridiculous.
    But still it doesn't change the fact that face covering is considered offensive in european culture.

    isn't that a bit like like saying "if women want to work the same job for less money they should be allowed to do so for having more job opportunities" ?

    if something is even obviously sexist to me (as said before the modest clothing also applies to the men, yet no burqa wearing men) as a man then why shouldn't i be allowed to voice my own opinion ?

    you know if you actually read my postings i never was for banning burqas etc. i just state that that was very offensive for many because of those reasons, me included. So far i haven't met a woman who thought different than me when the discussion came up (compared to heatly discussed topics like women-quotas in jobs etc.).

    Many people also have problems with minarettes which don't understand for example, since it's literally no different from a church tower. Those legislations for example (switzerland, looking at you) are simply crazy.


    Luckily such networks are in place.
    Sadly the networks/institutions in place for combating domestic violence /houses where women can safely stay in such incidents have to provide their services to higher percentage to muslim women despite the lower percentage of the population.

    Well i have met a muslim women who thought the opposite (aka hijab being against gender equality). In Turkey the lines pro/against are still very clearly split in liberal - conservative.
    On the other side in school one girl in the next class wasn't allowed by their parents to visit a (female) friends house for learning for the final exams in the afternoon unless accompied by her brother or sister. At age 17 mind you.


    ontopic but might also be interesting:
    the iconoclastic ban in the islam on pictures of mohammed by law actually includes all prophets of god. Since both Jesus and Moses are also prophets in the quoran they are included here as well.
    Muslim protests against offensive cartoons which involve jesus are a rare occurance though ;) Having forbidden paintings/idols of Jesus hanging in our churches haven't created uproars either.
    It shows that much of these protests are controlled and fuelled by political forces because in reality the average muslim knows as much about the quoran as the average christian knows about bible. Usually very little.
    And if they know about it, they are usually tolerant enough about it. Both sides ;).
    The theological knowledge especially of fanatical terrorists is rather limited or based on naive approaches to the holy texts according to actualy scholars.
    Can also seen with the Popes: Franciscus is hugely more popular than Benedict despite being only a lightweight in the actually theological discussion about the scripture.


    offtopic: Religion connected cultural traditions can evolve over time and can overcome sexist parts in it:
    In Austria there is the Tradition of the "Perchten/Krampusläufe" where on the 6th of december celebrating St. Nicholas young adult man wearing furry devil costumes with masks would run through the town causing chaos. And with chaos i mean beating up mostly people/vandal acts since prior to the festivities much of alcohol is drunk by them. The prime target of such beatings (with thin sticks) often were young women. Which meant usually that on the 6th of december young women locked themselves up at home. Because quite often it turned from the "slap on the leg" into a stay-in-hospital beating since the young men were protected by the anonymity of their masks.
    A few decades ago a zero tolerance policy was in troduced: The Krampus have to wear numbers (painted into fur etc.) and all crimes commited get prosecuted.
    Today it's a carneval like folklore festival visited by tourists and families alike. (And the incidents are rather limited)
     
  25. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #25
    Knowing as little as I do, I can see blame on both sides of the issue. A comment was made in one of these threads, that there is a group, maybe a large group who don't want to be assimilated, who want to maintain their standards, whatever those might be, possibly intolerant, sexist, and a perception that an insult directed at the creator, is worthy of punishment by death. If an accurate portrayal, how do you live with people like that?*

    *Note this is not my attempt to label all or most Muslims into an extremist category, but obviously there are some.
     

Share This Page