Je suis Charlie

lepperochan said:I'm sorry, but this freedom of expression is bullshit. world leaders walking arm in arm with each other over the death of some folk in Paris. have any of them stood in solidarity with the 2,000 victims Boko Haram left dead in one attack a couple of days ago. no

even the perceived freedom of expression that France supposedly afforded Charlie is bullshit, did you know one of their cartoonists is in court this week on charges of being anti-Semite cos he took the piss out of the president's son and his jew girlfriend  ...he was dismissed from the clearly much loved Charlie when he refused to apologize

it's all bullshit, fuck off


that is all. ..have a nice day, don't forget to graze the grass    

Barrack Osama sadly was unable to attend as he was fracking busy blowing up other countries, all in the name of freedom of speech and democracy. Democracy at the end of a gun isn't such a bad thing, keeps the sheep on  the grass.

Speaking of grass seems me mate Cameron wants to snoop on the Brits if he gets re-elected, maybe Russell Brands call for social revolution has the corporate kings in a tiff.
Imagine Brand running the country.

Just been googling the case mentioned by Lepperochan. It was back in 2009. The case was brought, not by the state, but by Licra, an anti-racist pressure group. It took a bit of finding but it seems he won the case. So that's one for freedom of speech, if true, is it not? 'Sine won a wrongful termination suit against Charlie Hebdo and a 40,000 euro court judgment. He also won the LICRA suit.'http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2015/01/10/charlie-hebdo-fired-cartoonist-for-anti-semitism/

ahh,  then I apologize for most of my outburst. cheers man

Sine is not from Charlie Hebdo. I know this story and he has created his own Sine hebdo, throwed to Charlie a very long time before! And I am sure of what I said about presidents from Nigeria and from Niger! Sorry, but I know what happen in my country. There were 17 dead in Paris, if you add the young policewoman killed by Coulibaly, the third murderer, who killed also four jews in a Super Market, friday!
However, I agree that it was only 17 death in Paris, and we can feel they are a little number in comparison with other death in Syria, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Lybia, in Mali, in Nigeria... and in Twin Towers at NYC. But the Freedom of Speech is so important that the demonstration was needed to say STOP to terrosists and other anti-domocrat people.

If you wish to see the cover of Charlie Hebdo, which will be published wenesday, see here http://md1.libe.com/photo/707192-une-charlie-png.jpg?modified_at=1421099764&width=750

fair point Malin,  though it should be noted that Sine did work for Charlie until he was dismissed cos he wouldn’t apologize

all in though, I accept your points with humility

one thing though, why do address the four killed in the supermarket as Jews instead of people. I don’t get that, 12 people got killed in the first attack, none of their faiths were disclosed by the media, whats up with the jews

The third murderer was an imature guy (the two brothers too, but not at this level) and he wanted to make a big crime before being killed by policemen to go in paradise with thousend virgins!!! And he chooze this market, because near the location where were the two brothers. Many young people in France belive that Palestinian crisis would be solved by killing jews. A sad bad mad humorist, Dieudonné, propagates this theory where jews are responsible or major problems for palestinian people. Perhaps, we could critic Israel politic, but not make confusion between Israel and jews... Same confusion with islam and islamic terrorists!
Thank you to talk together, lepperochan!

It is one thing to have freedom of speech. It is another thing to use such freedom to mock and satire. And it is another thing entirely to mock and satire a religion or belief system.
I am sad that people have been killed.
But I do not see them as flawless.

Comedy and Laughter conquer Terrorism, but Love conquers all.

On a side note it would be really helpful if someone could time travel and make it so that all humanity and religions would treat any death other than dying of old age (naturally), as a complete and utter failure.

Thanks Malin for the link to Wednesdays cover. I saw that earlier today and it put a huge big smile on my face. Fuck religion, any religion and fuck people who can't take their beliefs being satirized, mocked or challenged. If you're too shallow in your conviction or too fanatical in your belief to handle it without violence you need to let the rest of the modern world pass you by and go back to the shithole cave, mountain, trailer,shack or forest you came from.
JE SUIS CHARLIE!!!  

Old saws about having and eating cake spring to mind, Viddax. The whole essence of freedom of speech is to allow people to say what they want, and that includes the Westboro Baptist Church. It is Voltaire's famous maxim - I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. I defend maximum freedom of speech because those who do not like it can argue against it. But if there is no freedom of speech then I cannot argue for it. A somewhat circular argument I accept. Satire and mockery are valid forms of criticism, and who is to draw an arbitrary line where this should be curtailed? Should Animal Farm have been banned because it satirised communist Russia? Belief systems are in the arena. They are there to be taken apart, analysed, criticised and laughed at. And those who laugh must expect the same from others. Otherwise, as edead says, somewhat more pithily than I can, retire from the modern world. I can never pretend that freedom of speech is easy or pleasant. There is a downside to everything. But I would rather have it than not, and that means having the freedom to mock and satirise. And to say that it is wrong to mock and satirise!
Love conquers all? Not that I've ever noticed. Not in the face of an AK47.

hey, Adams and Paisley had some good lovin’ going on in Stormont, love can overcum the Ak

The purpose of satire is to wound, offend, question and mock. Political and religious institutions are wide open to this kind of lampooning and in a society which sees itself as free and democratic should have enough confidence in themselves to take it on the chin. If you think the satirists have overstepped the mark, take them or their publication to court and fight your case according to the law. No written or spoken criticism justifies violence and murder, and this has surely been the defining feature of fundamentalist religions and totalitarian states throughout history: they don't debate, they slaughter, which is why they deserve to be mocked, opposed and rejected whenever possible.

As for Adams and Paisley, I don't think there was much "lovin'" going on between them, more a case of a 'grit your teeth and hold your nose' kind of relationship. To paraphrase a remark that has been made elsewhere, if you want a friend in politics, get a dog.

I think we need to hold our opinions for a few weeks and let the emotions and hysteria die down.

Gore the sacred cow all you want, the audience has the freedom not to read it.
Not to buy it.

But they do not have the freedom to kill you, I do not care if it is some dumbshit for a religion,  or some dumbshit for a government.

If conservation of stupidity is in effect, then religious conservatives and extremists appear to have cornered the market.

Spare me the talk about maximum freedom of speech: speech is not entirely free, given the arbitrary tyranny of communication. As in you have to use certian sounds of symbols to convey meaning and cannot communicate simply through metaphysical intent.

So if you are right Ceejay then does that not mean that satire and mockery in the face of such violence is pointless and weak: you satire, they kill. It just seems to be a form of psycholigical bullying: lets all laugh and snigger at the barbarian who does not understand the words. Which in turn does not point to us being enlightend, or better.

My point is that if we as a society have enough wit and cunning to mock something for its faults, do we not also have the same capability to educate and inform. In a way so that rather than being antagonistic, we can actually all get along. Otherwise it seems a bit like someone who swaggers about everywhere using elaborate phrases to belittle others, and then screams to high heaven when someone justifiably lashes out at them.

It must just be me, but sometimes it just seems that western society is melodramatic about small things and just ignores bigger problems as long as they are not in its back yard.
(I am not saying the Hebdo killings are melodramatic, as life is invaluable and important, but that the there are lots of shows of force like marches, protests, and memorials to name a few that supercede the original message in favour of making a big spectacle.)

Of course speech is not entirely free, Viddax, which is why I used the term maximum. If it had been total you would have had a point. I am not at all sure what communication through metaphysical intent means, let alone carried out, and I cannot see why the ‘arbitrary tyranny’ of communication limits free speech. Speech may itself be limited in terms of communication, but unlimited in terms of its freedom.

Satire and mockery may be helpless in direct confrontation with terrorism, but do not underestimate their social power. It may be psychological bullying under certain circumstances, but by no means necessarily. The subversive example of Soviet Underground Humour springs to mind. Indeed satire is more often the weapon of the ‘underdog’ than the ruling elite.

Finally, you set up a false dichotomy. It is not a question of mockery or education, but the usual human mishmash of both. Both have their place.