ChatterBank1 min ago
Brave Or Foolhardy?
http://
Personally, I don`t see the point in being deliberately inflammatory.
Personally, I don`t see the point in being deliberately inflammatory.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 237SJ. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
This would be a good opportunity for Charlie Hebdo to stop being deliberately inflammatory and respect the Muslims who have been offended by their publication but who are desperately sorry that these lunatics have killed in the name of their God.
----------------
Er, how is that gonna work then? Charlie Hebdo's mission statement is pretty much to be as inflammatory as possible! It respects no one and nothing, which it has every right to do. It pillories every facet of society, so why should they reel themselves in? It's a satirical rag-mag, not the Daily Telegraph.
----------------
Er, how is that gonna work then? Charlie Hebdo's mission statement is pretty much to be as inflammatory as possible! It respects no one and nothing, which it has every right to do. It pillories every facet of society, so why should they reel themselves in? It's a satirical rag-mag, not the Daily Telegraph.
Damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
If they eased up on the more inflammatory content, it would look as if they were kowtowing to terrorism.
If they go ahead and print, they put themselves, their workers, distributors and commercial partners in the line of fire.
It's a tough call.
Personally, I think what they are doing is both brave/laudable and reckless/stupid in equal measure.
However, I don't think I would be shouting for them to print cartoons of the prophet, because there are other ways they can stick two fingers up (as many of the excellent satirists have been doing since last week).
It's way too easy to support this move when none of us are personally putting our lives, or the lives of our family, friends and loved ones at risk.
If they eased up on the more inflammatory content, it would look as if they were kowtowing to terrorism.
If they go ahead and print, they put themselves, their workers, distributors and commercial partners in the line of fire.
It's a tough call.
Personally, I think what they are doing is both brave/laudable and reckless/stupid in equal measure.
However, I don't think I would be shouting for them to print cartoons of the prophet, because there are other ways they can stick two fingers up (as many of the excellent satirists have been doing since last week).
It's way too easy to support this move when none of us are personally putting our lives, or the lives of our family, friends and loved ones at risk.
No, it is very left-wing and subversive, taking no prisoners. I have only bought it once. Had it not been for the events of last week most people would not have heard of it, and those who had would not use it for toilet paper. It is somewhat ironic that the tragedy has elevated this rag to a cult status, when in reality it has a circulation in France less than that of the Viz in Britain.
Nowt more offensive than these in his name
http://
http://
IF the staff of Charlie Hebo were only putting their own lives at risk then its their choice but by continuing to inflame a very delicate situation they are putting the lives of every one in the Western world at danger, even Muslims. Someone in this difficult situation needs to rise above the parapets and take the moral high ground here -its obviously not going to be fundamentalist terrorists, but in my opinion the last thing anyone should be doing is throwing fuel onto the flame in what could be construed by the terrorists as an act of war. This could all be hypothetical, as I've heard that the cartoon they will be featuring is a drawing of the prophet Mohamed crying, holding a 'Je Suis Charlie' placard with the caption 'Tout est Pardonne' 'All is Forgiven' which I think is very appropriate.
It seems that all the media in Britain, newspapers and TV, are too spineless to show us a picture of this front page.
-----------------------
Indeed dave, rather ironic that the 'cheese eating surrender monkeys' are showing bravery in the face of terror by standing up for the most fundamental facet of democracy while others are measured and cautious.
-----------------------
Indeed dave, rather ironic that the 'cheese eating surrender monkeys' are showing bravery in the face of terror by standing up for the most fundamental facet of democracy while others are measured and cautious.
It doesn’t matter what anyone does to try to assuage these madmen – we won’t stop them killing. They are intent on imposing their unacceptable, medieval philosophy upon the rest of the world and death holds no fear for them. On principle why should we even consider conceding to them by compromising our own values - and by extension our own freedom?
It is entirely appropriate for Charlie Hebdo to do this as that is what they do: not sure I would approve of others copying them just for the hell oof it.
On the other hand the cartoon they will publish (which is already widely available of course) should be used by papers to illustrate the story, which is a big one I guess
On the other hand the cartoon they will publish (which is already widely available of course) should be used by papers to illustrate the story, which is a big one I guess
If the protests against the recent front covers of Charlie Hebdo had been confined to strongly-worded opinion articles/ letters, etc., then I'd agree that it becomes tasteless and needlessly provocative to publish again and again the same sort of image that is causing offence. On the other hand, the point about free speech is that it includes the right to cause such offence -- what's going on is that many people are defending the magazine's right to be so tasteless, while wishing that it chose not to. And then of course there was not a peaceful protest at all but a violent response in which several of the magazine's staff died. The response to that ought to be one of defiance. "We'll continue to be tasteless until you start behaving like people we'd be happy not to offend" might be the sort of message we're trying to convey.
