• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should we flood the world with images of Muhammed?

Should we flood the world with images of Muhammed?

  • Total voters
    70
Hatuey said:
Not hiding perse, they were more like... putting on display. That which they were putting on display was the casual French bigotry, racism and xenophobia towards all of those who aren't entirely French. The same Muslims who they had no problems slaughtering in Algeria, the blacks who they have no problem enslaving for years were the ones they casually attacked in their pages. It is a magazine that gave a voice to the mostly white academic class in France that finds no problem punching down. I won't pretend like they were some beacon for an important form of free speech, they are a racist and xenophobic publication whose entire raison d'être was the offense of other groups. Sure, their freedom of speech should be defended but it's not as if these people will be considered anything but racist and xenophobic a 100 years from now. Sort of like the cartoons I posted. :shrug:
Click to expand...

You're wrong about CH. I don't think you understand them at all. These guys were ultra left wing hippies. Children of the "Mai 68" revolution. Anti-establishment, anti-religion, anti-capitalism, anti-authority, anti-Western imperialism. White academics hate CH as much as any other group they made fun of. There is nothing inherently racist or xenophobic in any of their cartoons. If there was, they would have been shut down under French anti-racism laws. The very same government who is now hailing them as heroes tried repeatedly to shut them down. And failed miserably. Some of the CH survivors working on the upcoming issue, are reportedly nauseated by this display of support from countless people who attacked them in the past. If I remember correctly, you speak French. I urge you to look up the entirety of their work, put it in the context in which it was published and you will see that they treated everyone, white, black, muslim, christian, Jewish, man and women in the exact same offensive way. There is a story behind each cartoon. There is a specific context behind each caricature. I hated their work and thought their humor too crass and crude, but I've never seen anything racist or xenophobic in them. Not a single cartoon elevated one race over another, or one ethnicity over another. They made fun of ethnic French people with the same vitriol they directed at everyone else they thought deserved their weekly scorn.
 
matchlight said:
I certainly hope you're not suggesting that the jihadists who destroyed those ancient Buddhas that had been carved into the stone in Afghanistan were showing disrespect for any other religion! Since when is firing artillery rounds at ancient religious art anything but a show of tolerance and respect?
Click to expand...
If the media was smart they would bring this up.They would highlight all the disrespect die hard Muslims have shown towards other religions.
 
spangledbanner said:
We Australians are not American or French and this type of thing is illegal in Australia. Charlie Hedbo could not have published his trash in Australia or he would have been arrested. We have laws that make his type of trash illegal. In Australia you cannot use media to insult or humiliate people.

Do you French and Americans want to start insulting Aboriginals do you? If you have such freedom to be obnoxious then what is all the fuss over the Redskins logo?

Is attacking African Americans with media an act of freedom and artistic expression? This is what the world has come to with USA leading and France as "the capital of the world" is it? You French and Americans have the right to be offensive, obnoxious and provocative and this is freedom is it? Well not in Australia. Us Aussies disagree with your uncivilized idea of freedom.
Click to expand...

Really????

https://www.google.com/search?q=aus...=_3m1VP_ZC8KYyAT8lIGgCQ&ved=0CB0QsAQ#imgdii=_

Lots of cartoons there that look pretty insulting to me...
 
spangledbanner said:
We Australians are not American or French and this type of thing is illegal in Australia. Charlie Hedbo could not have published his trash in Australia or he would have been arrested. We have laws that make his type of trash illegal. In Australia you cannot use media to insult or humiliate people.

Do you French and Americans want to start insulting Aboriginals do you? If you have such freedom to be obnoxious then what is all the fuss over the Redskins logo?

Is attacking African Americans with media an act of freedom and artistic expression? This is what the world has come to with USA leading and France as "the capital of the world" is it? You French and Americans have the right to be offensive, obnoxious and provocative and this is freedom is it? Well not in Australia. Us Aussies disagree with your uncivilized idea of freedom.
Click to expand...

Wasn't the Australian solution to the "problem" of the aborigines pretty much just shoot them all???
 
matchlight said:
It's predictable at times like this that leftist America-haters will show their true colors. Watch how they run this country and its culture down, and it becomes clear they don't have much more time for America, or for Western Civilization in general, than Muslim jihadists do. It's clear some of them are also driven by lack of nerve--they imagine that if they bow and do as these subhuman jihadist bastards tell them, they will be nice to us.

For anyone who hasn't read it, I'd again like to recommend an excellent and eye-opening book by Andy McCarthy, "The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America." The "grand jihad" is taken from a phrase in a strategy document written some years ago by one of the many Muslim Brotherhood front groups operating in the U.S. CAIR, though this was not its document, is probably the best known of these fronts. As Secretary of State, one prominent leftist, Hillary "The Belle of Benghazi" Clinton, was heavily involved with various Islamist organizations in efforts to find ways to suppress speech offensive to Muslims. To someone who knows about all that, it's not surprising this President sent only our Ambassador to the recent demonstration in Paris. B. Hussein Obama, in his heart of hearts, probably thinks those smart-mouthed white people at Charlie Hebdo got just what they were asking for.

Mrs. Clinton also was heavily involved in President Pinocchio's foreign policy misadventures in Egypt and Libya. Her main advisor in engineering the replacement of Hosni Mubarak with the Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Morsi--himself since replaced by Mr. Sisi--was Huma Abedin, the wife of the scandalized exhibitionist Anthony Weiner. Several members of Abedin's family in Egypt had close, longstanding connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic supremacist groups. Just the sort of person I'd expect to see serving a President who has bowed and scraped to the Muslim world ever since he first took office. Mr. Obama has the same sympathetic attitude toward Islamic extremists that most leftists do. He carries on an half-hearted, ineffective campaign against them to look like he's doing something. But in fact by showing weakness to them--our sworn enemies--he has invited another 9/11--or worse.
Click to expand...

23902887.jpg
 
Dragonfly said:
How do pictures punish people?

If you don't like a picture - don't look at it.

Pretty simple.

I don't like "rape porn". So easily enough, I won't watch it.
Click to expand...

in the minds of fanatical extremists such as the people responsible for killing the editors of Charlie Ebdo, it is not as simple as you make it out to be.

those satirical pictures of the prophet Mohammed were viewed as insult to the extremists, because according to their fanatical beliefs insulting the prophet mohammed is akin to being physically violated. in their minds, this was somthing that could not be ignored, only avenged.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
in the minds of fanatical extremists such as the people responsible for killing the editors of Charlie Ebdo, it is not as simple as you make it out to be.

those satirical pictures of the prophet Mohammed were viewed as insult to the extremists, because according to their fanatical beliefs insulting the prophet mohammed is akin to being physically violated. in their minds, this was somthing that could not be ignored, only avenged.
Click to expand...

#1) I know all that

#2) Actually - it is that simple
 
Arcana XV said:
You're wrong about CH. I don't think you understand them at all. These guys were ultra left wing hippies. Children of the "Mai 68" revolution. Anti-establishment, anti-religion, anti-capitalism, anti-authority, anti-Western imperialism. White academics hate CH as much as any other group they made fun of. There is nothing inherently racist or xenophobic in any of their cartoons. If there was, they would have been shut down under French anti-racism laws. The very same government who is now hailing them as heroes tried repeatedly to shut them down. And failed miserably. Some of the CH survivors working on the upcoming issue, are reportedly nauseated by this display of support from countless people who attacked them in the past. If I remember correctly, you speak French. I urge you to look up the entirety of their work, put it in the context in which it was published and you will see that they treated everyone, white, black, muslim, christian, Jewish, man and women in the exact same offensive way. There is a story behind each cartoon. There is a specific context behind each caricature. I hated their work and thought their humor too crass and crude, but I've never seen anything racist or xenophobic in them. Not a single cartoon elevated one race over another, or one ethnicity over another. They made fun of ethnic French people with the same vitriol they directed at everyone else they thought deserved their weekly scorn.
Click to expand...

We simply will not see eye to eye on this. I see them as nothing more than part of the same French academic elite which depicted whites negatively when it suited them and that was about it. Their vitriol, as you correctly put it, was just a continuation of what has been done for the past 100 years when it comes to other people living on their land. They demonize Muslims, they dehumanize blacks, they attack Jews, just as their forefathers did and occasionally made a few jokes at their own expense. That's the reason I should be pretending that they were anything other than racists and homophobes? No. I'm willing to defend their right to do it, but I won't pretend that their speech was anything but what it was.

Secondly, I do speak French and unlike most people here, as such, I'm not as quick to defend the content of the speech simply because they were attacked. That's what most people have done, they've never read anything in Charlie Hebdo, and yet they're quick to defend them when they constantly complain about the treatment of Christians by the American media. I find these kinds of stances hypocritical at best and a sign of a wider problem in media at worst. It's related problem where whites simply feel that occasionally making fun of themselves makes their racism acceptable to minorities. That's simply not true and no amount of free speech rhetoric can change that. As I said, I can defend their right to say it, but I won't pretend it was anything other than hatred in cartoon form.
 
Hatuey said:
We simply will not see eye to eye on this. I see them as nothing more than part of the same French academic elite which depicted whites negatively when it suited them and that was about it. Their vitriol, as you correctly put it, was just a continuation of what has been done for the past 100 years when it comes to other people living on their land. They demonize Muslims, they dehumanize blacks, they attack Jews, just as their forefathers did and occasionally made a few jokes at their own expense. That's the reason I should be pretending that they were anything other than racists and homophobes? No. I'm willing to defend their right to do it, but I won't pretend that their speech was anything but what it was.

Secondly, I do speak French and unlike most people here, as such, I'm not as quick to defend the content of the speech simply because they were attacked. That's what most people have done, they've never read anything in Charlie Hebdo, and yet they're quick to defend them when they constantly complain about the treatment of Christians by the American media. I find these kinds of stances hypocritical at best and a sign of a wider problem in media at worst. It's related problem where whites simply feel that occasionally making fun of themselves makes their racism acceptable to minorities. That's simply not true and no amount of free speech rhetoric can change that. As I said, I can defend their right to say it, but I won't pretend it was anything other than hatred in cartoon form.
Click to expand...

Voltaire : I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
 
I favor keeping the internet clean .. thus .. no pics of Islams "hero" .
 
Hatuey said:
We simply will not see eye to eye on this. I see them as nothing more than part of the same French academic elite which depicted whites negatively when it suited them and that was about it. Their vitriol, as you correctly put it, was just a continuation of what has been done for the past 100 years when it comes to other people living on their land. They demonize Muslims, they dehumanize blacks, they attack Jews, just as their forefathers did and occasionally made a few jokes at their own expense. That's the reason I should be pretending that they were anything other than racists and homophobes? No. I'm willing to defend their right to do it, but I won't pretend that their speech was anything but what it was.

Secondly, I do speak French and unlike most people here, as such, I'm not as quick to defend the content of the speech simply because they were attacked. That's what most people have done, they've never read anything in Charlie Hebdo, and yet they're quick to defend them when they constantly complain about the treatment of Christians by the American media. I find these kinds of stances hypocritical at best and a sign of a wider problem in media at worst. It's related problem where whites simply feel that occasionally making fun of themselves makes their racism acceptable to minorities. That's simply not true and no amount of free speech rhetoric can change that. As I said, I can defend their right to say it, but I won't pretend it was anything other than hatred in cartoon form.
Click to expand...

Well that's the thing. It was not occasionally making fun of themselves. It was week in and week out. Why do you think the government and most French politicians couldn't stand them? Believe me if was not because of the few Mohamed cartoons. It was for the similar crap that CH threw at them on a weekly basis. But, obviously, those kind of cartoons would not have made it into the headlines outside France and, the magazine itself not being readily available outside the country, I can understand how you would get the impression that they were constantly focused on minorities. For the record whenever they made fun of Muslims, it was in an Islamic extremism context and when they made fun of Jews it was to accuse them of thinking they were special and beyond criticism. I can't really think of any instances where they made fun of Africans in a racist manner, but then again I didn't read them regularly. I just happened to leaf through it occasionally at my sister's house. She's a huge fan for some reason that has always escaped me. Sometimes I wonder if she was adopted.
 
Dragonfly said:
Voltaire : I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, Arcana and I are discussing this from the perspective of people who have actually seen the cartoons, and who speak the language, and have actually been in the culture. She believes that they were equal opportunity haters, I find that hard to believe given French culture and the hatred they espoused (most of which was veered towards other groups within France, you know the pas assez Français types). We both agree that they have a right to say it, we just don't agree on what to label the speech. I'm perfectly fine with calling it hate speech, protected hate speech, but hate speech none the less. She feels that occasionally taking potshots at whites makes their hatred towards those who aren't French enough seem more palatable. I simply do not. French leftist movements have proven time and time again that they do not care for culture, ancestry and tradition unless it is their own. Their allies in French Canada (the PQ) have proven the same with their latest attempts on Muslims as well as their attacks on anything less than Quebecois de Souche. That's just an ideology I can't endorse, even if I respect their right to have it.
 
Hatuey said:
Pretty much, Arcana and I are discussing this from the perspective of people who have actually seen the cartoons, and who speak the language, and have actually been in the culture. She believes that they were equal opportunity haters, I find that hard to believe given French culture and the hatred they espoused (most of which was veered towards other groups within France, you know the pas assez Français types). We both agree that they have a right to say it, we just don't agree on what to label the speech. I'm perfectly fine with calling it hate speech, protected hate speech, but hate speech none the less. She feels that occasionally taking potshots at whites makes their hatred towards those who aren't French enough seem more palatable. I simply do not. French leftist movements have proven time and time again that they do not care for culture, ancestry and tradition unless it is their own. Their allies in French Canada (the PQ) have proven the same with their latest attempts on Muslims as well as their attacks on anything less than Quebecois de Souche. That's just an ideology I can't endorse, even if I respect their right to have it.
Click to expand...

Hatuey, this is precisely the type of people that Charlie Hebdo despised and made fun of the most. The people who go around parroting the rhetoric of the Front National, "la France aux Français!" and similar BS. Le Pen himself said "Je ne suis pas Charlie Hebdo". There is a LOT of bad blood there.
 
Arcana XV said:
Well that's the thing. It was not occasionally making fun of themselves. It was week in and week out. Why do you think the government and most French politicians couldn't stand them? Believe me if was not because of the few Mohamed cartoons. It was for the similar crap that CH threw at them on a weekly basis. But, obviously, those kind of cartoons would not have made it into the headlines outside France and, the magazine itself not being readily available outside the country, I can understand how you would get the impression that they were constantly focused on minorities. For the record whenever they made fun of Muslims, it was in an Islamic extremism context and when they made fun of Jews it was to accuse them of thinking they were special and beyond criticism. I can't really think of any instances where they made fun of Africans in a racist manner, but then again I didn't read them regularly. I just happened to leaf through it occasionally at my sister's house. She's a huge fan for some reason that has always escaped me. Sometimes I wonder if she was adopted.
Click to expand...

_80155413_twittermaxblumenthal.png
996655_10152090235931320_1809448756_n.jpg


Please, tell me in what possible context you'd find this to be anything other than racist? I mean, sure they took potshots at whites, but did they do based on the whiteness of the person? We can argue that they sometimes hit at whites, but we know the context and intended message wasn't the same.
 
spangledbanner said:
We Australians are not American or French and this type of thing is illegal in Australia. Charlie Hedbo could not have published his trash in Australia or he would have been arrested. We have laws that make his type of trash illegal. In Australia you cannot use media to insult or humiliate people.

Do you French and Americans want to start insulting Aboriginals do you? If you have such freedom to be obnoxious then what is all the fuss over the Redskins logo?

Is attacking African Americans with media an act of freedom and artistic expression? This is what the world has come to with USA leading and France as "the capital of the world" is it? You French and Americans have the right to be offensive, obnoxious and provocative and this is freedom is it? Well not in Australia. Us Aussies disagree with your uncivilized idea of freedom.
Click to expand...

Isn't it nice to be able to say that?
 
Hatuey said:
_80155413_twittermaxblumenthal.png
996655_10152090235931320_1809448756_n.jpg


Please, tell me in what possible context you'd find this to be anything other than racist? I mean, sure they took potshots at whites, but did they do based on the whiteness of the person? We can argue that they sometimes hit at whites, but we know the context and intended message wasn't the same.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes. I remember this one well. This cartoon was drawn after some idiot from the Front National called Christine Taubira (the person in the caricature) a monkey. Note the logo, red white and blue flames at the bottom left of the drawing. That is the Front National logo. It was Charb, making fun of the racists in that party.

As for the one with the Pope, that's their typical anti-religion crap, but I do agree this one is borderline racist.
 
Arcana XV said:
Ah, yes. I remember this one well. This cartoon was drawn after some idiot from the Front National called Christine Taubira (the person in the caricature) a monkey. Note the logo, red white and blue flames at the bottom left of the drawing. That is the Front National logo. It was Charb, making fun of the racists in that party.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware, that's why I asked you: In what context would you not find a repetition of said statement racist? I mean, if Obama got called a monkey by Stormfront, and Stan Lee decided to draw Obama as a monkey, would it not be racist? As I said, these cartoons when taken at face value are depictions of what the mostly White French cultural elite feel they are entitled to say because they occasionally make fun of themselves. I don't disagree that they have a right to say it, but I won't pretend it's not racist either.
 
Dragonfly said:
In support of all victims of all islamic terrorist actions, should every single media outlet, publication, and private individual start printing/posting/publishing drawings of Muhammed?

Think about it. If every single person/business/group/corporation with a facebook page, instagram, snap chat, blog, forum, and web page spent a week posting nothing but pictures of Muhammed would it make a statement?

If every single non-muslim with the means to "protest" in this way banded together and posted pictures, it would number in the billions.

Would it make any kind of difference? Would it resonate with the Muslim world at all?

A world-wide grass-roots movement to collectively say "we're not going to submit to terrorist threats" and "we fully support the freedom of speech and freedom of the press/media". Would you participate?

Is it time for every single non-Muslim to post a cartoon/drawing of Muhammed in a collective gesture of support, and defiance against violence?
Click to expand...

People are free to do as they like, but this would seem like quite the waste of time.
 
Ikari said:
People are free to do as they like, but this would seem like quite the waste of time.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Maybe not. I'm sure somewhere somebody thought the ice bucket challenge thing was a waste of time too.

Who knows. A worldwide non-violent protest in the name of free speech might have a positive effect.

The question is, would it make anything worse?
 
Dragonfly said:
Maybe. Maybe not. I'm sure somewhere somebody thought the ice bucket challenge thing was a waste of time too.

Who knows. A worldwide non-violent protest in the name of free speech might have a positive effect.

The question is, would it make anything worse?
Click to expand...

It could possibly make things worse and prompt the crazy fundamentalists to increase the frequency and magnitude of their responses. Though that shouldn't be cause for someone to stop exercising rights and freedom.
 
Hatuey said:
Yes, I am aware, that's why I asked you: In what context would you not find a repetition of said statement racist? I mean, if Obama got called a monkey by Stormfront, and Stan Lee decided to draw Obama as a monkey, would it not be racist? As I said, these cartoons when taken at face value are depictions of what the mostly White French cultural elite feel they are entitled to say because they occasionally make fun of themselves. I don't disagree that they have a right to say it, but I won't pretend it's not racist either.
Click to expand...

Don't take my word for it. Watch what the president of SOS Racisme has to say about Charlie Hebdo.

"Charlie Hebdo, le plus grand hebdomadaire anti-raciste" - Video
 
Ikari said:
It could possibly make things worse and prompt the crazy fundamentalists to increase the frequency and magnitude of their responses. Though that shouldn't be cause for someone to stop exercising rights and freedom.
Click to expand...

Or, they see that billions and billions support free speech and will not cower to religious subjugation and they turn their efforts towards something more productive.

Who knows.
 
Arcana XV said:
Don't take my word for it. Watch what the president of SOS Racisme has to say about Charlie Hebdo.

"Charlie Hebdo, le plus grand hebdomadaire anti-raciste" - Video
Click to expand...

SOS Racisme? Do you know their history with the Socialist Party in France and quotas? The people who have problem "fighting" anti-semitism but will support islamophobia? Forgive if I don't take their opinion on who is and isn't racist with anything but a grain of salt. These are the sorts I was discussing. I saw the video and it doesn't change my opinion. People like this coming to the defense of CH are just part of the mostly white French cultural elite who feel that if someone sometimes says something mean about a white person, racism should become palatable to minorities.* That simply doesn't hold true for me in the least bit because I see it as a continuation of a larger xenophobic and racist tradition within media.

*(Granted, the speaker wasn't white then again - their Republican views on meritocracy and message wouldn't gather many donations if the figurehead was a white French man)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom