The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:55 pm

sikax wrote:Your puppy is not the issue here!!

Yes, I will also bow out and brainstorm on how to fix the world's problems.

Bomb out all the Northern Hemisphere?

No?

Ok.

Whitey · Post by **Whitey** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:59 pm

Dr_Liszt wrote:
sikax wrote:Your puppy is not the issue here!!

Yes, I will also bow out and brainstorm on how to fix the world's problems.
Bomb out all the Northern Hemisphere?

No?

Ok.

You do remember where I live right?

Boomer · Post by **Boomer** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:02 pm

sikax wrote:
sikax wrote:There are much broader things to address. Like how Western imperialism and racism has effectively created the environment that would push one to violent terrorism. How Western powers continue to oppress and shake their dicks at Arabs and the rest of the world. When cartoonists focus on the fight of "to draw or not to draw", the other things lose focus and the vision of the real issues get skewed. Yes, there are insane terrorists out there who do unspeakable things to innocent people. They do this even without provocation sometimes. Is it really smart to push their buttons juuuuuust a little bit more? To prove a point? "Ha, fuck this guy. He hates my cartoons. I'm gonna draw more! Ha!" I mean, fuck. The terrorist has other more terrible things to scheme and resources on stopping it really shouldn't be spent on whether a cartoonist got to express himself this week.

When faced with a religious tenet saying that you can't draw something you will have cartoonist's saying "fuck you" to preserve their artistic license, you'll have journalists say "fuck you" to rally against censorship, and you'll have secularists say "fuck you" to preserve their freedom from religion.

When a religious tenet (which you yourself have observed isn't really even a core aspect of the religion, more of a tradition) starts to infringe on other people's freedoms, then sorry; I feel the cartoonists, journalists, secularists, et al shouldn't really be bound by it, and I feel calling them indecent for it is not really fair either.

LSK · Post by **LSK** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:15 pm

"Given the sinister nature of rape culture in this country, and the looming threat of sexual violence, does it really make sense for women to behave like drunken sluts?"

Post by **Gendo** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:27 pm

LSK wrote:"Given the sinister nature of rape culture in this country, and the looming threat of sexual violence, does it really make sense for women to behave like drunken sluts?"

I may have missed it, but has someone on this thread said that we shouldn't make fun of Muslims because of the looming threat of terrorism? Silax specifically said otherwise:

It isn't the threat of violence that should compel someone not to depict Muhammad for no other reason than "artistic expression", it should be simple compassion.

LSK · Post by **LSK** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:28 am

Reply #25

It really doesn't matter how many people in the world consider depictions of Muhammed blasphemous. But some are willing to bring violence to people for it. Is it worth it? Is someone's defense of their so-called freedom of speech worth losing lives? Is freedom of speech worth anything if it's exercised "because I can"? I mean, how fucking hard is it just to leave Muhammed out of your cartoon? If there's a hostile person with a gun to someone's head and this man says to a cop, "I swear I'll shoot him if you...uh...put a top hat on your head!" should the cop put a top hat on his head just because it's his right to wear top hats? No, that would be very stupid. That guy is going to die. Not doing something because of threat is not the same as "letting the terrorists win". It's just keeping the fucking peace and probably saving lives.

See also #31 for related content.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:36 am

LSK wrote:"Given the sinister nature of rape culture in this country, and the looming threat of sexual violence, does it really make sense for women to behave like drunken sluts?"

I think we had established that the rape scenario/victim blaming thing doesn't apply considering rape victims haven't bombed and oppressed their aggressors to the point of extremism. Also considering that the power dynamics in this scenario benefits the victims way more than the "rapists".

This is what Castor tried to point out in his post. The power dynamics here puts Islam clearly in a disadvantage. They are an oppressed group who we are refusing to listen and take into account. We are telling them to STFU and take it.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:40 am

Ok puppy taken care of.

I think we need to identify the contributing factors of the root issue. Then explain how those factors contribute. And finally, flood social networks with this information. Big media is not an option because media moguls are the largest benefactors of wealthy conservative politicians.

I mean i dont have the first clue as to what specific western foreign policy is oppressive to Arabs so let's start there . Educate me to the what's and how's of western imperialism.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:30 am

I mean i dont have the first clue as to what specific western foreign policy is oppressive to Arabs so let's start there

All of them??

A lot of Arabic countries have oil and that is what the West wants. The problem is that for some reason the West decides to "steal" the resource instead of buying it for a fair price. I;m thinking that the real problem there is currency. They are forced to maintain the currency or get invaded. I don't understand very well how that thing works, because it's very economical, but I guess it's like a deal with the petrodollar. And oil and Petrodollar is what keeps the dollar strong. So I imagine these countries have to keep a deal with this system and changing it for something more on their favor will weaken the dollar.

So that's where things get complicated. How could you fix something like that?

Post by **Gendo** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:37 am

LSK wrote:Reply #25

It really doesn't matter how many people in the world consider depictions of Muhammed blasphemous. But some are willing to bring violence to people for it. Is it worth it? Is someone's defense of their so-called freedom of speech worth losing lives? Is freedom of speech worth anything if it's exercised "because I can"? I mean, how fucking hard is it just to leave Muhammed out of your cartoon? If there's a hostile person with a gun to someone's head and this man says to a cop, "I swear I'll shoot him if you...uh...put a top hat on your head!" should the cop put a top hat on his head just because it's his right to wear top hats? No, that would be very stupid. That guy is going to die. Not doing something because of threat is not the same as "letting the terrorists win". It's just keeping the fucking peace and probably saving lives.

See also #31 for related content.

Ok, fair enough. I agree with your post as a valid criticism of that. But Silax did clarify afterwards that it's NOT because of the threat of violence that should stop people from drawing those cartoons.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:48 am

This entire thread blows my fucking mind and I'm too damn sick to even say what I really want to say. These assholes killed 12 people because some of those people poked fun at their goddamn childish fairy-tales and their pedophile prophet. If you are too thin-skinned to handle jokes about your childish beliefs then stop having childish fucking beliefs. There might be a point to a few of the posts on these threads if the cartoons made fun of Arabs, but they didn't. They made fun of Muslims. An Arab can't stop being an Arab, a Muslim can get an education and stop being a Muslim. Arabs are a minority in the West by no fault of their own except choosing to move to the West or being born into a family that previously moved to the West. Muslims are a minority by choice. Should people stop making jokes about Xenu because they might offend Tom Cruise and John Travolta? Scientologists are a minority. The very idea that you should have freedom until it offends someone is revolting. It doesn't even make sense. The entire point of freedom is that you have the right to do things that others might dislike, otherwise the concept of freedom is fucking meaningless. The fact that someone might get angered by you exercising your freedom is not a reason for you to refrain from exercising that freedom, it's the reason you have that freedom in the first place. Sunni Islam's ban on depictions of pedo-prophet applies to Sunni Muslims only. It doesn't apply to anyone else. It can't apply to anyone else. I'm too sick to even say what I really want to say, but this is the stupidest damn thread in the short history of this board.

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:52 am

CashRules wrote:This entire thread blows my fucking mind and I'm too damn sick to even say what I really want to say. These assholes killed 12 people because some of those people poked fun at their goddamn childish fairy-tales and their pedophile prophet. If you are too thin-skinned to handle jokes about your childish beliefs then stop having childish fucking beliefs. There might be a point to a few of the posts on these threads if the cartoons made fun of Arabs, but they didn't. They made fun of Muslims. An Arab can't stop being an Arab, a Muslim can get an education and stop being a Muslim. Arabs are a minority in the West by no fault of their own except choosing to move to the West or being born into a family that previously moved to the West. Muslims are a minority by choice. Should people stop making jokes about Xenu because they might offend Tom Cruise and John Travolta? Scientologists are a minority. The very idea that you should have freedom until it offends someone is revolting. It doesn't even make sense. The entire point of freedom is that you have the right to do things that others might dislike, otherwise the concept of freedom is fucking meaningless. The fact that someone might get angered by you exercising your freedom is not a reason for you to refrain from exercising that freedom, it's the reason you have that freedom in the first place. Sunni Islam's ban on depictions of pedo-prophet applies to Sunni Muslims only. It doesn't apply to anyone else. It can't apply to anyone else. I'm too sick to even say what I really want to say, but this is the stupidest damn thread in the short history of this board.

Yeah, it's way easier to convince a billion people that their beliefs are wrong than for cartoonists to just...not draw somebody.

But, are you serious? No one should ever emigrate because life as a minority is tough?

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:08 am

No one should ever emigrate because life as a minority is tough?

That's not even remotely close to what I said.

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:31 am

Then I'm confused what "Muslims are a minority by choice" means.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:49 am

It means they choose to be Muslim, not that they choose to emigrate. I was contrasting the choice of being Muslim with the non-choice of being ethnically Arab. Even worse, they choose to be members of a specific Muslim sect that thinks their club rule against depictions of their prophet should apply to people who aren't members of the club.

Ptolemy_Banana · Post by **Ptolemy_Banana** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:51 am

Boomer wrote:I'm not going to lie, I laughed like hell the first time I read the article.

Humor aside, I do agree it misses the point and fails to address historical and contemporary issues on why the Charlie Hedbo pictures are seen as bigoted.

Seen as bigoted by whom? The journalists were not murdered because their cartoons were bigoted. They were murdered because they were blasphemous.

Ptolemy_Banana · Post by **Ptolemy_Banana** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:55 am

CashRules wrote:This entire thread blows my fucking mind and I'm too damn sick to even say what I really want to say. These assholes killed 12 people because some of those people poked fun at their goddamn childish fairy-tales and their pedophile prophet. If you are too thin-skinned to handle jokes about your childish beliefs then stop having childish fucking beliefs. There might be a point to a few of the posts on these threads if the cartoons made fun of Arabs, but they didn't. They made fun of Muslims. An Arab can't stop being an Arab, a Muslim can get an education and stop being a Muslim. Arabs are a minority in the West by no fault of their own except choosing to move to the West or being born into a family that previously moved to the West. Muslims are a minority by choice. Should people stop making jokes about Xenu because they might offend Tom Cruise and John Travolta? Scientologists are a minority. The very idea that you should have freedom until it offends someone is revolting. It doesn't even make sense. The entire point of freedom is that you have the right to do things that others might dislike, otherwise the concept of freedom is fucking meaningless. The fact that someone might get angered by you exercising your freedom is not a reason for you to refrain from exercising that freedom, it's the reason you have that freedom in the first place. Sunni Islam's ban on depictions of pedo-prophet applies to Sunni Muslims only. It doesn't apply to anyone else. It can't apply to anyone else. I'm too sick to even say what I really want to say, but this is the stupidest damn thread in the short history of this board.

/forum.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 8:31 am

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X62OBmcOniQ#t=63[/youtube]

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 8:58 am

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:01 am

There's still a significant difference between racism/bigotry and angering people who think everyone should abide by the rules of their private little club. They don't draw pictures of pedo-prophet and they don't mention the fact he was a kiddie-fiddler, therefore everyone else should act the same. I personally find some of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons abhorrent and I would prefer people not act that way, but the ones that do nothing but portray Muhammad in an unflattering light and/or make reference to him dicking a child, these are simply based on fact.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:29 am

I think it needs to be clarified, again, that taking issue with(refusing to stand in solidarity with) hate speech/racist propaganda of the cartoonists is not an endorsement of the violence inflicted upon them. Just because you can only process this issue in that dichotomy doesn't mean everyone else must. I refuse to treat a bunch of oppressive, powerful assholes as some kind of martyrs for free speech. I'm really only taking issue with people that cannot see the multiple dimensions of this....people that lack major perspective due to privilege and an inability to analyse power. And I'm sick and tired of powerful, white people blindly(blind to the fact that the voice/speech of the powerful cannot be truly infringed upon), uncritically, framing every issue around free speech. You block an abusive racist, they cry FREE SPEECH, a feminist moderates her comments, they cry FREE SPEECH, you tell them they say something racist/oppressive, it's FREE SPEECH...Goddamn. Part of the irony is that it's not as if the state is infringing upon their rights...which technically/legally is what free speech is all about. And, you know, when something that was created to make sure the powerful don't abuse the powerless, is now being used by the powerful to suppress the powerless...it's time to start thinking a little more critically...not one-dimensionally...and be less blind to power.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:37 am

CashRules wrote:There's still a significant difference between racism/bigotry and angering people who think everyone should abide by the rules of their private little club. They don't draw pictures of pedo-prophet and they don't mention the fact he was a kiddie-fiddler, therefore everyone else should act the same. I personally find some of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons abhorrent and I would prefer people not act that way, but the ones that do nothing but portray Muhammad in an unflattering light and/or make reference to him dicking a child, these are simply based on fact.

Yeah, but I don't think you can really separate the Islamophobic agenda of the West from all that. I'm not really defending any delusions about their prophet, or anyone that is offended simply because the prophet is drawn(I mean, if that was all there was to it, I would agree with you)...but I cannot separate that from the intentions, agenda, and aggression of the West.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:02 pm

CashRules wrote:This entire thread blows my fucking mind and I'm too damn sick to even say what I really want to say. These assholes killed 12 people because some of those people poked fun at their goddamn childish fairy-tales and their pedophile prophet. If you are too thin-skinned to handle jokes about your childish beliefs then stop having childish fucking beliefs. There might be a point to a few of the posts on these threads if the cartoons made fun of Arabs, but they didn't. They made fun of Muslims. An Arab can't stop being an Arab, a Muslim can get an education and stop being a Muslim. Arabs are a minority in the West by no fault of their own except choosing to move to the West or being born into a family that previously moved to the West. Muslims are a minority by choice. Should people stop making jokes about Xenu because they might offend Tom Cruise and John Travolta? Scientologists are a minority. The very idea that you should have freedom until it offends someone is revolting. It doesn't even make sense. The entire point of freedom is that you have the right to do things that others might dislike, otherwise the concept of freedom is fucking meaningless. The fact that someone might get angered by you exercising your freedom is not a reason for you to refrain from exercising that freedom, it's the reason you have that freedom in the first place. Sunni Islam's ban on depictions of pedo-prophet applies to Sunni Muslims only. It doesn't apply to anyone else. It can't apply to anyone else. I'm too sick to even say what I really want to say, but this is the stupidest damn thread in the short history of this board.

Let's not pretend that these were beautiful crafted paintings of the prophet that attacked only a specific group. These were hate ridden cartoons against Islam in general and were extremely racist against Arabs. If you can't see that then you are blinded by your own hatred of Islam. It's not stupid to talk about the imperialist repercussion of imperialist countries.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:26 pm

Cassius Clay wrote:[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X62OBmcOniQ#t=63[/youtube]

I love that guy. I felt identified with him in one of his videos where he says "I have a question to ask to white people, what the heck is your problem?
I saw myself in there.

Also... let's also remember that freedom of speech and freedom of press is one of the many rights that are taken away by imperialist oppression. So this is not just "I WANNA DRAW MUHAMAD ALL I WANT" "I WANNA BE RACIST ALL I WANT" This is the government choosing what kind of racism and what kind of freedoms are ok to express. Drawing offensive cartoons of Muhammad is not exercising freedom of speech, is just playing the powerful's game by being an idiot and a racist by propagating racism.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:06 pm

blinded by your own hatred of Islam

Yeah, that's it.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:31 pm

Dr_Liszt wrote:
Cassius Clay wrote:[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X62OBmcOniQ#t=63[/youtube]
I love that guy. I felt identified with him in one of his videos where he says "I have a question to ask to white people, what the heck is your problem?
I saw myself in there.

Also... let's also remember that freedom of speech and freedom of press is one of the many rights that are taken away by imperialist oppression. So this is not just "I WANNA DRAW MUHAMAD ALL I WANT" "I WANNA BE RACIST ALL I WANT" This is the government choosing what kind of racism and what kind of freedoms are ok to express. Drawing offensive cartoons of Muhammad is not exercising freedom of speech, is just playing the powerful's game by being an idiot and a racist by propagating racism.

The guy is awesome. He has a very critical, comedic mind. It's good to have a comedian that is devoted to consistently "punching up" in a world of ironic racism, oppressive humor and what not. A breath of fresh air. And I enjoy his sharp and patient delivery. Like with this one:

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:34 pm

I'm sure you've seen this one before.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:11 pm

CashRules wrote:
blinded by your own hatred of Islam
Yeah, that's it.

And I just loooooooooooooooooooove that your comment came after I told Dragon what really oppresses Arabic countries is Currency and after your post it all became "waah my free speech" all over again. I know it wasn't your intention.

So I'm going to say it again:

Currency is the main problem of Arabic countries. I know you don't like to hear about it. But yes it's currency what oppresses the third world, and people in the first world want their economy to be strong forever, so there you have it. The reason why this world sucks.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:34 pm

I have decided it is all gendoism < my autocorrect changed Geocology to that so i suppose our only choice now is to blame Gendo.

That was just too good. I'm not even going to bother with the serious response i had!!!!

The Pitters' Place

The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo

Re: The Onion on Charlie Hebdo