Je Suis Charlie?

[Soulman]

What a shocking lapse in editorial judgement. Those sleazeballs in Germany on NYE deserve both barrels, both satirically and literally, but that innocent little kid most certainly does not.

Agreed.

 

[Paul Reids Sock]

I quietly made the point a year ago, (not here), that the producers of Charlie Hebdo were being held up as pillars of free speech when they suddenly became everyone's favourite publication despite the fact the virtually no-one had ever seen or read any of their content. I admire their stance on the far right and their supporters etc but I can't abide their deliberately provocative publications. Much of it serves no purpose other than to offend or to show that they can publish whatever they want, it's free speech right?

There should be a proverb - "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should"

I couldn't agree with you more.

I didn't feel comfortable with them being held up in society for their 'incredible' show after the attacks. Yes, they were attacked by islamic terrorists, however they represent a tiny percentage of Muslims. By publishing pictures of Mohamed they are offending a whole religion.

No, it's not illegal, but lets just have a bit of respect for eachother as humans! But hey, they have an English football forum discussing it so they have achieved their aim of attention

I wonder how they would react if someone produced a cartoon like this but the corpse wasn't this dead child but depicted as one of their colleagues that died that day?

 

[knocky1]

Because the adults know what they are doing and the dangers involved in the journey, that poor little boy didnt.

Should have stayed at home.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?scl...s..0.12.860.i96JaevAEDM#imgrc=UtS9fXIElRsJtM:

 

[5mins-from-amex]

I have to agree with the OP on this one, complete lack of judgement.

 

[BigGully]

What a shocking lapse in editorial judgement. Those sleazeballs in Germany on NYE deserve both barrels, both satirically and literally, but that innocent little kid most certainly does not.

Was the dead boy the catalyst for leaders in the West to allow the unfettered access to Europe, which is a direct result of the large scale incidents that have taken place within parts of Europe, perhaps thats the point, I do not know.

I am just guessing that any editorial of any reasonable publication or even a vaguely unreasonable one wouldn't take it upon themselves to ridicule the death of any young child.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

What a shocking lapse in editorial judgement. Those sleazeballs in Germany on NYE deserve both barrels, both satirically and literally, but that innocent little kid most certainly does not.

It could also be a statement saying to all those who think automatically that all kids from Syria will just turn into rapists and molesters to have a look at their conscience and think again

 

[Exile]

1 child asylum seeker drowns. 1000 adult asylum seekers rob, rape and sexually assault women.
It's fair comment.

I'm not convinced you even come close to understanding the 'comment', tbh.

 

[Exile]

Was the dead boy the catalyst for leaders in the West to allow the unfettered access to Europe, which is a direct result of the large scale incidents that have taken place within parts of Europe, perhaps thats the point.

It could also be a statement saying to all those who think automatically that all kids from Syria will just turn into rapists and molesters to have a look at their conscience and think again

Both good and vaild interpretations of the cartoon, I think - personally I think its supposed to be a comment on the hypocrisy of the press (and broad public opinion).

I guess, unpleasant though it is to many of us, its thought provoking.

 

[BigGully]

I couldn't agree with you more.

I didn't feel comfortable with them being held up in society for their 'incredible' show after the attacks. Yes, they were attacked by islamic terrorists, however they represent a tiny percentage of Muslims. By publishing pictures of Mohamed they are offending a whole religion.

No, it's not illegal, but lets just have a bit of respect for eachother as humans! But hey, they have an English football forum discussing it so they have achieved their aim of attention

I wonder how they would react if someone produced a cartoon like this but the corpse wasn't this dead child but depicted as one of their colleagues that died that day?

Your kiddin me, its a religion an ancient mythical story that deserves ridicule and not deference, it spawns bigotry, torture and abuse and as with all religions undoubtedly written by men wholly unable to even consider sexual equality, give it a good kickin' it deserves nothing else, modern and scientific thinkers have got the west with some semblance of tolerance, equality and justice, not religion.

 

[Randsta]

Both good and vaild interpretations of the cartoon, I think - personally I think its supposed to be a comment on the hypocrisy of the press (and broad public opinion).

I guess, unpleasant though it is to many of us, its thought provoking.

I agree but it is in pretty poor taste also .......I mean they could have said he could have grown up to be the next anything i.e something positive!

 

[Paul Reids Sock]

Your kiddin me, its a religion an ancient mythical story that deserves ridicule and not deference, it spawns bigotry, torture and abuse and as with all religions undoubtedly written by men wholly unable to even consider sexual equality, give it a good kickin' it deserves nothing else, modern and scientific thinkers have got the west with some semblance of tolerance, equality and justice, not religion.

I'm not saying I agree with the religion, or any relgion for that point.

But millions do, and basically all of Europe celebrating a magazine publishing something that they knew would be offensive is just ridiculous.

I work with a couple of Muslim guys and grew up with a couple more, none of them torture people, none of them abuse people, but they took offence that a big part of their religion was mocked like that.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Should have stayed at home.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?scl...s..0.12.860.i96JaevAEDM#imgrc=UtS9fXIElRsJtM:

The father had the choice of going to a proper camp or making that dangerous journey to the EU. I know what I would do in his situation, I would go to a camp.

 

[BigGully]

I'm not saying I agree with the religion, or any relgion for that point.

But millions do, and basically all of Europe celebrating a magazine publishing something that they knew would be offensive is just ridiculous.

I work with a couple of Muslim guys and grew up with a couple more, none of them torture people, none of them abuse people, but they took offence that a big part of their religion was mocked like that.

Big deal to your mates, so they were offended, you should of told them to not be so silly and perhaps they should keep their offence to those Muslims countries that abuse and torture and fight for some level of equality for the Muslim women, but nah wet themselves over a frigging cartoon.

 

[Paul Reids Sock]

Big deal to your mates, so they were offended, you should of told them to not be so silly and perhaps they should keep their offence to those Muslims countries that abuse and torture and fight for some level of equality for the Muslim women, but nah wet themselves over a frigging cartoon.

we will clearly never agree, and they do agree that people shouldn't be treated like that. It's not just muslims that do.

I'm happy to agree to disagree

 

[BigGully]

we will clearly never agree, and they do agree that people shouldn't be treated like that. It's not just muslims that do.

I'm happy to agree to disagree

With respect its no longer valid in my view to defend some of the most extreme behaviour within the Muslim world by saying 'not all', we kinda know that.

 

[nwgull]

I'm not saying I agree with the religion, or any relgion for that point.

But millions do, and basically all of Europe celebrating a magazine publishing something that they knew would be offensive is just ridiculous.

I work with a couple of Muslim guys and grew up with a couple more, none of them torture people, none of them abuse people, but they took offence that a big part of their religion was mocked like that.

If they were offended, then tough shit. I'm sure that stuff is published everyday that might offend me and thousands of others, but most people recognise that it doesn't actually affect them - not to mention agree with freedom of speech - and can just ignore it and get on with their lives.

 

[mikeyjh]

This is looking a bit like a case of people being all for free speech, providing that it's free speech that they agree with and doesn't offend them.

I think the above posters that identify the satire as intending to show the hypocrisy of the views towards refugees have hit the nail on the head.

I think your post is a bit patronising - I am for 'free speech' regardless of whether I agree or not, but it's the definition of free speech that we may not be aligned on. There is the free speech = say what you want without fear of recrimination school of thought, but that is obviously unrealistic and not what most people want. To me free speech means (vaguely) that freedom to express your views in the confines of what society on the whole finds broadly acceptable. It's not binary and it is difficult to nail down, but it certainly doesn't mean the former.

Point 2 is just a get out of jail free card, say what you want then tell people that they don't understand the (post fact) satire....

 

[portlock seagull]

I think your post is a bit patronising - I am for 'free speech' regardless of whether I agree or not, but it's the definition of free speech that we may not be aligned on. There is the free speech = say what you want without fear of recrimination school of thought, but that is obviously unrealistic and not what most people want. To me free speech means (vaguely) that freedom to express your views in the confines of what society on the whole finds broadly acceptable. It's not binary and it is difficult to nail down, but it certainly doesn't mean the former.

Point 2 is just a get out of jail free card, say what you want then tell people that they don't understand the (post fact) satire....

You've defeated your own argument there.

 

[Creaky]

If they were offended, then tough shit. I'm sure that stuff is published everyday that might offend me and thousands of others, but most people recognise that it doesn't actually affect them - not to mention agree with freedom of speech - and can just ignore it and get on with their lives.

How many calling for 'freedom of speech' are/would be happy for radicals in this country to say what they want without fear of censure - all under the umbrella of 'freedom of speech'.

 

[mikeyjh]

How many calling for 'freedom of speech' are/would be happy for radicals in this country to say what they want without fear of censure - all under the umbrella of 'freedom of speech'.

Few people appear to understand 'freedom of speech', as demonstrated in post 58