h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

"Do you mean that denouncing extremism and bigotry should only be allowed if it's either incisive, popular and/or funny? "

No. I mean satire needs to be incisive and funny. Charlie Hebden as far as I'm aware was never that popular. I find the implications of your response over simplistic and crass.

I was asking an honest question about what you meant. Thank you for making it clearer, it is easy to misunderstand people in a debate.

Superfrenchie:

"I have very little doubt that, if this offensive material had not been there, they would have found something else to get offended at.
So, yeah, *other* people would have died, not those ones."

I think the same.

There is more than offence in the motivation.

experts analysts will explain all that one day, but from what we can infer, in case we look a bit to history and read other non mainstream media, we can infer that there´s a mix of lunacy together with the necessary economical support and manipulation of the most powerful democratic west as UK, US, France... and Saud Arabia.

The attacks on Madrid (11 March, 2004) 192 people died. Many of them Muslims and other inmigrants. The attacks were made in a hour and in an area usually full of working class people and students.
What was their offence? of those people in London? or those in NY or those in Casablanca,etc. because there´s a long etc. that include those children in Pakistan or just yesterday, the suicide was a 10 years old girl.

So,no BG, I´m not saying they were asking for them. I´m sorry you read of my post only my name and skip to the next post.

read the link about that cartoonist, Joe Sacco, he explain with drawings my point.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2015/jan/09/joe-sacco-on-satire-a-response-to-the-attacks?CMP=fb_gu

A religious person´view. He´s a Rabbi

http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/mourning-the-parisian-journalists-yet-noticing-the-hypocrisy/

Not psychotic.

Psychosis is a symptom of disorders such as schizophrenia. If we are to label people with religious beliefs as psychotic (an often misused term), we may have to consider all people with religious faith psychotic.

A more appropriate term is psychopathic.

PP.

Psychopathic in this context - not all people with religious faith. Doh!

PP.

I stand corrected.

Off to the march in my town. Wish me luck.

Bon chance

Who makes the Prophet look more ridiculous, someone who draws a tasteless cartoon, or the terroristic thugs who insist on showing the world how intolerant they are?

I try not to disrespect Muslims, but there is no way I could ever take their faith seriously when they do not rise en-mass to denounce these idiots.



F S

FS,
You have missed something, there´re lots of them condemning the killings. Also Muslim organizations, mosques, etc., everywhere.

Some will go to that demostration in Paris, and although they know the cartoons attacked not just fanatics but muslims in general they´ll have to endorse the cartoons, because doing otherwise will mean you support the killings.

They're not endorsing the cartoons, they're condemning the killings.

"I try not to disrespect Muslims, but there is no way I could ever take their faith seriously when they do not rise en-mass to denounce these idiots."

You will always be dissatisfied with the response from any group of people using such criteria. For one thing, Muslims like all of us have very limited means to denounce the attacks en-mass.

As an atheist I see all religions as pointless, but I respect everyone's right to hold their personal beliefs and to live their lives by them. I don't see why an entire faith shouldn't be 'taken seriously' due to the actions of an unjustifiable extremist minority.

Ironically your post is disrespectful to Muslims.

"They're not endorsing the cartoons, they're condemning the killings."

One of the problems with this kind of highly sensitive and tragic event is that the two issues become blurred. In an earlier post I tried to make the point that the cartoons aren't funny, were never that popular, and were not effective satire. But this was misinterpreted to the point where what I had said was seen as analogous to saying a rape victim 'asked for it' for wearing a short skirt.

Thank you Maria

I am glad to see that I am wrong, I can only judge by what I see and hear.

I hope that the great majority of Muslims condemn this cowardly act.

Lusus, I did not intend to disrespect anyone. I think we can all respect each other without endorsing everything the believe in



F S

"They're not endorsing the cartoons, they're condemning the killings."


when people say Je suis Charlie what do they mean?

I abhor the killings but don´t endorse the cartoons? I don´t think so.

Many will think so, but who´s going to say I´m not Charlie? They risk to be accused of supporting the killings or of being against freedom of speech.

This is a really complex situation. And maybe we have to wait a while to see the many facets of it.

How many guilties are here, what is satire, should freedom of speech observe context...

Right now, my mind is in the international politicians that will attend today demostration.

Mr Rajoy, the spaniard who has just made a law, the "gag law" to prevent demostrations, freedom of gathering, etc. Ms Merkel, the representative of a set of policies that are literally killing many europeans and put many more in misery and poverty. Netanjahu... the president of a terrorist government which only this summer has carried out another chapter of his programmmed genocide. There are many more , those who are in the high horse of morals teaching the world lessons of freedom and democracy.

Most people who say Je suis Charlie aren't saying they endorse the cartoons, most people haven't even *seen* the cartoons. They've seen the killings on the news, and they abhor them, and then they see the social media, and they add their voice to it.

Hi Maria

Right now my thoughts are with all of those people out there on the streets and those who are really at its lead, the families and friends of those who have been killed and injured, I think it is an incredible response, there are a diversity of expressions out there, it is nuanced and the politicking is superfluous

"when people say Je suis Charlie what do they mean?"

They're saying whether you agree with the cartoons or disagree with them, mass killing of people is no justification for being offended.

If you think they're saying different then that's an issue you have to deal with.
There have been loads of interviews with people, journalists etc where they disagree completely with the format of cartoons produced by Charlie but that doesn't detract from the fact that Charlie has the right and freedoms to publish as they see fit without fear of being killed by moronic thugs with a warped sense of reality.

"If you think they're saying different then that's an issue you have to deal with."

This doesn't mean anything. Its simply saying that if someone disagrees with you, then its up to them to deal with your point of view.

Looking for a positive way through this, I remember after the hostage situation in Australia the hashtag 'walkwithme' became popular. Muslims felt afraid they would become targets for reprisals, so non-Muslims used the hashtag as an offer to walk with them in public. I found that very encouraging for a broader sense of unity against such attacks, and would love to see a similar response in France and the rest of Europe.