I Am Not Charlie Hebdo

[Liokault]

Isn't all this "je suis Charlie Hebbdo" hypocritical?

All the newspapers declaring that they are Charlie, where are their illustrations of Mohammed? To be Charlie Hebbdo, surly you need to do more than be vaguely interested in free speech, you need to be able to take the risk.

Which papers/news organizations have reprinted or broadcast the images that so offended the Snack Bars? Wouldn't showing the spark for the current trouble be valid news?

I know that the BBC has a bad on broadcasting anything which might offend our peace loving co-inhabitants on this isle, but what about everyone else?

[Dog Star]

I wonder what the Mods would do - would have to do? - if a Mo Cartoon was put on this forum? Haymarket(?) would have something to say, no? Would they bow down before the terrorists?

[youngsyr]

Dog Star said:

I wonder what the Mods would do - would have to do? - if a Mo Cartoon was put on this forum? Haymarket(?) would have something to say, no? Would they bow down before the terrorists?

I recall seeing the specific cartoon posted on one of the other threads last week and it appeared to have been up for some time by the time I saw it.

[DonnyMac]

Dog Star said:

I wonder what the Mods would do - would have to do? - if a Mo Cartoon was put on this forum? Haymarket(?) would have something to say, no? Would they bow down before the terrorists?

There already is one, 24th post here - http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Surprised it was posted up, more surprised it stayed.

[Chimune]

OP. would you display one on your car ?

[jurbie]

If Charlie Hebdo had been published in Britain.

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/what-...

I can't really disagree with any of the points made but maybe this is a turning point for us and the next time someone is shouted down for speaking their mind they can just retort with 'Je Suis Charlie'.

[Liokault]

Chimune said:

OP. would you display one on your car ?

Funny that, I was thinking on the way into work this morning, how long would it take my windscreen to get smashed if I put a picture from CH on my car.

To answer your question: I haven't joined in the hypocrisy or I'm Charlie. As much as I'm all for freedom of speech and all that, and as much as I believe that there is an Islamic plot to take over the west as is normal here on PH, I find that the original pictures from Hebbdo were a bit far.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think that the correct response should have been the killing of so many people, or indeed any people, but I do think that if I put a picture of Mohammed naked and bent over, with a star over his anus and the caption "another star is born" on a car, a broken windscreen wouldn't be a surprising response. frankly, I would expect a similar response if it was a bent over Jesus.

I kind of think that this is where I'm going with this. Everyone is talking about freedom of speech, but what Hebbdo printed was pretty low (extreme even) and everyone seems to be glossing over that.

Are we really making a "freedom of speech" hero out of the guy who shouted "fire" is a crowded theater, only to be killed in a stampede?

[Dog Star]

jurbie said:

If Charlie Hebdo had been published in Britain.

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/what-...

I can't really disagree with any of the points made but maybe this is a turning point for us and the next time someone is shouted down for speaking their mind they can just retort with 'Je Suis Charlie'.

That'd be funny if it weren't so true.

[audidoody]

Interesting points. Does a girl who wears a short mini dress etc deserve to get raped?

'Life of Brian' was regarded as blasphemy in its day.
Salmon Rushdie can tell you all about people who have no sense of humour

You think the cartoon was low. I think it didn't go far enough in lampooning medieval psychotics. That's what free thought is all about.

We have forums like this to agree and disagree without killing each other.

[jogon]

Dog Star said:

jurbie said:

If Charlie Hebdo had been published in Britain.

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/what-...

I can't really disagree with any of the points made but maybe this is a turning point for us and the next time someone is shouted down for speaking their mind they can just retort with 'Je Suis Charlie'.

That'd be funny if it weren't so true.

I know, the NUS already try and get UKIP banned from student campuses up and down the country and also refuses to condemn ISIS as its islamiphobic.

[Baryonyx]

Dog Star said:

That'd be funny if it weren't so true.

Indeed, but collectively the British are cowards, unable and unwilling to say what they want. At least in France they take freedom of speech quite seriously.

[carinaman]

Baryonyx said:

Dog Star said:

That'd be funny if it weren't so true.

Indeed, but collectively the British are cowards, unable and unwilling to say what they want. At least in France they take freedom of speech quite seriously.

Charlie Hebdo came about on the back of the 1968 student riots in Paris.

Thanks for the Spiked link about student journalism. Thought provoking stuff.

[trashbat]

Liokault said:

Isn't all this "je suis Charlie Hebbdo" hypocritical?

All the newspapers declaring that they are Charlie, where are their illustrations of Mohammed? To be Charlie Hebbdo, surly you need to do more than be vaguely interested in free speech, you need to be able to take the risk.

Which papers/news organizations have reprinted or broadcast the images that so offended the Snack Bars? Wouldn't showing the spark for the current trouble be valid news?

I know that the BBC has a bad on broadcasting anything which might offend our peace loving co-inhabitants on this isle, but what about everyone else?

Standing up for free speech and free press, thus 'being Charlie Hebdo', doesn't require you to republish the particular content, which you may disagree with. It only requires that you stand up for the ability to do so.

On the other hand, many find the 'Je Suis Charlie' identifier personally disagreeable, because CH has often done things that many would consider racist, and others that people would consider poor taste at best.

Edit: regarding the latter, this is one argument put forward. For avoidance of doubt, I don't hold up Labour List as something I'm aligned with, and nor do I necessarily agree with the thrust or particulars of their argument, but it makes some interesting points.

Edited by trashbat on Monday 12th January 10:22

[otolith]

"Je suis Charie" does not mean "I'm in favour of publishing offensive cartoons of Muhammad". It means "I'm in favour of freedom of expression".

[CAPP0]

audidoody said:

medieval psychotics

Like.

[Derek Smith]

audidoody said:

Interesting points. Does a girl who wears a short mini dress etc deserve to get raped?

'Life of Brian' was regarded as blasphemy in its day.
Salmon Rushdie can tell you all about people who have no sense of humour

You think the cartoon was low. I think it didn't go far enough in lampooning medieval psychotics. That's what free thought is all about.

We have forums like this to agree and disagree without killing each other.

There was an interview with Malcolm Muggeridge back in the days of convex TVs about LofB. I found it shocking at the time due to how nonsensical the chap was yet was given air time.

Muggeridge reckoned he's seen a miracle. It seems that fast film stock for movie cameras wasn't invented but came about spontaneously on the instructions of a god because our Muggeridge interviewed mother Therasa (note the fact that is was a miracle as he was doing the interview. The conceit!)

There were lords and such saying that the actors, director and producers should all be imprisoned.

[otolith]

trashbat said:

On the other hand, many find the 'Je Suis Charlie' identifier personally disagreeable, because CH has often done things that many would consider racist, and others that people would consider poor taste at best.

Edit: regarding the latter, this is one argument put forward. For avoidance of doubt, I don't hold up Labour List as something I'm aligned with, and nor do I necessarily agree with the thrust or particulars of their argument, but it makes some interesting points.

It has been argued that many people outside France completely fail to understand the context of the "racist" cartoons.

http://67-tardis-street.tumblr.com/post/1075899558...

[Liokault]

otolith said:

"Je suis Charie" does not mean "I'm in favour of publishing offensive cartoons of Muhammad". It means "I'm in favour of freedom of expression".

I take it as "I endorse the publications of Charlie".

It's all very well standing by someone, but why with all this out pouring of angst, is everyone standing by "Charlie" with is the bounds acceptable to his attackers. Seems odd to me.

Didn't Charlie Hebbdo publish way back that there was only risk in offending Muslims if only CH offended them and that what should happen to make all press safe is for all print media to stick their heads over the top of the trench.

Well, it didn't happen and Charlie got singled out and shot.

My guess is that there will soon be a rule within main stream media not to publish images offensive to Islam.

[trashbat]

otolith said:

It has been argued that many people outside France completely fail to understand the context of the "racist" cartoons.

http://67-tardis-street.tumblr.com/post/1075899558...

That might work, except for at least one incident where they accused themselves, e.g.

http://www.worldbulletin.net/news/152585/charlie-h...

[CAPP0]

Liokault said:

otolith said:

"Je suis Charie" does not mean "I'm in favour of publishing offensive cartoons of Muhammad". It means "I'm in favour of freedom of expression".

I take it as "I endorse the publications of Charlie".

Au contraire, I too take it to mean "we should all be able to say what we think without fear of reprisal", ie freedom of speech/expression, as otolith says.