| Pengarang |
Topik: Je suis Charlie |
618 balasan
|
|
|
Je suis Charlie.
The human mind is puny in so many disturbing ways....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jake Stothard @ January 8th 2015,16:30:52 ) "The editorial staff of Hebdo consistently aimed to provoke Muslims. They ascribe to the same edgy-white-guy mentality that many American cartoonists do: nothing is sacred, sacred targets are funnier, lighten up, criticism is censorship. And just like American cartoonists, they and their supporters are wrong. White men punching down is not a recipe for good satire, and needs to be called out. People getting upset does not prove that the satire was good. And, this is the hardest part, the murder of the satirists in question does not prove that their satire was good. Their satire was bad, and remains bad. Their satire was racist, and remains racist. (...)
The statement, “JE SUIS CHARLIE” works to erase and ignore the magazine’s history of xenophobia, racism, and homophobia. For us to truly honor the victims of a terrorist attack on free speech, we must not spread hateful racism blithely, and we should not take pride in extreme attacks on oppressed and marginalized peoples."
http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/2015/01/in-the-wake-of-char...
'Nobody should have been killed over those cartoons. Flubber those cartoons.'
"Free speech is an important part of our society, but, it should always go without saying, free speech does not mean freedom from criticism. Criticism IS speech"
Criticism is speech. Criticism is not, a 9mm to the head
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Martin Warnett @ January 8th 2015,17:05:15 ) Utter rubbish. Internet forums are full of garbage, there's your free speech. People want the freedom to say whatever they like without accepting responsibility for the comments they make, yelling "freedom of speech".
I don't agree with that, internet forums and fb requires you to accept some conditions before signing. So, if there is a moderation, they can run police pursuits and bad speakers could be arrested. Technically, there is no freedom of speech on such these websites. In reality, it's different if you count kids below 14...
So it's not true to say that people can say what they like.
|
|
|
|
Je suis Charlie..
Let's just leave it there for a bit..
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jake Stothard @ January 8th 2015,16:30:52 ) Their satire was bad, and remains bad. Their satire was racist, and remains racist
Sorry Jake but this is absolutly bullshit !
I knew them for years and they only used to fight against obscurantism (all of them), racism and totalitarianism (and the fact to mock or criticize a superstition is not racism except if you really think that muslim or christian are races) .
They were the oposit of xenophobic (they were fighting against FN in France and agaisnt all racisms).
Here they just ask us if our right to blaspheme, witch is very important in France, should be abandoned in favor of fundamentalists of ANY religion.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Kirsty Ridley @ January 8th 2015,17:06:37 ) I don't agree with this. Words can cause wars, trigger huge reactions, words are not harmless. However, they shouldn't be a reason to die.
People always kill people. Words as fireguns don't kill. For me, you can't start wars with only words, and btw starting a war with words is certainly the best example of stupidity. Extremists are just blind and stupid people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Aymeric Gaurat @ January 8th 2015,17:15:51 ) Quote ( Martin Warnett @ January 8th 2015,17:05:15 )
Utter rubbish. Internet forums are full of garbage, there's your free speech.
People want the freedom to say whatever they like without accepting responsibility for the comments they make, yelling "freedom of speech".
I don't agree with that, internet forums and fb requires you to accept some conditions before signing. So, if there is a moderation, they can run police pursuits and bad speakers could be arrested. Technically, there is no freedom of speech on such these websites. In reality, it's different if you count kids below 14...
So it's not true to say that people can say what they like.
Of course there's moderation. People making defamatory claims then whine about the moderation, yelling "freedom of speech".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#103 dikirim Jan 8 2015, 18:21:29 (terakhir disunting Jan 8 2015, 18:43:45 oleh Rui Morais)
|
Sebut
|
By reading all this above, I believe there is not a lot of people that really understands what "freedom of speech" means.
Most probably they don't understand what "freedom" means.
Freedom is not doing or saying whatever we want. Everyone should understand that freedom implies respecting other people. If we do or say something that makes other people unable to be free, then that is not freedom.
I will never stand for people who kill others just because they don't agree or accept other people's oppinion.
I will support people who claims and defend "freedom of speech".
Je suis charlie!!!
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Rui Morais @ January 8th 2015,18:21:29 ) Freedom is not doing or saying whatever we want. Everyone should understand that freedom implies respecting other free people. If we do or say something that makes other people unable to be free, then that is not fredom. What more can you say? Well said Rui.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Rui Morais @ January 8th 2015,18:21:29 ) freedom implies respecting other free people.
Incorrect. We must respect all people. Even those who are not free and don't want to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
je suis charlie (black livery for friday)
|
|
|
|
This issue is a collision (a very hard one) between two oposite ways of looking on purpose of life.
On one side we have people who believe in humanity free of transcedental influence. Phrase "freedom of speech" is sacred to them, human life is their religion. Of course only if you think like them. Because if someone would say he or she is happy someone blew them up or anything against their sacred things you can bet your two cents they would restrict him or her from freedom of speach and probably wouldn't mind someone blowing them away in return. Making fun of other people sacred things is fine by them, but they are were intolerant and hostile for all of those who are attacking their religion (thier own life).
On the other side we have religious fanatics who value their transcedental believes over their lives and would even sacrifice their lives and lives of all other people for something they believe in. They are intolerant to all of those who do not think like them and believe they should be changed by force or killed. They believe in forbiding free speech and instructing people what to say. As human life does not mean much to them they are willing to sacrifice it, but also a lifes of their enemies and "inocent" people passing by.
In reality these two are pretty much similar. Completely intolerant to ones who do not share their "religion". Of course if you see yourself in one of these two concepts you will probably get mad at me for comparing them. And most likely you would wish for me not to speek any more.
On the third side we have people who are expressing their sympathy, but only because, well, right now it's a hot topic. Tomorrow they will foget the issue as they forgot Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and all other countries that recently soldiers from their country went to introduce democracy. These are the majority as concept of relativism is prevailing in the Western World today. Their moto would be close to: I am sorry, but hurry up. You have only 5 minutes of my sympathy so use it well.
On fourth side we have people who are aware that all of these concepts do not contribute to creating a better world. World in which there will be freedom of speech, but one responsibly used for getting people closer to each other. Unfortunatelly these people are not many or they are not loud. Their voice is not to be heard between religious and antireligious yelling.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jonathan MacLean @ January 8th 2015,17:13:52 )
Criticism is speech. Criticism is not, a 9mm to the head
Agreed there, they weren't referring to that though, they were referring to the fact people are being told not to criticize the work now as people have died for it. The fact someone died for it does not change the fact I don't agree with their work, at the same time they should not have been killed for it, nothing can justify murder.
Quote ( Franc Stefani @ January 8th 2015,17:18:47 ) Sorry Jake but this is absolutly bullshit !
I knew them for years and they only used to fight against obscurantism (all of them), racism and totalitarianism (and the fact to mock or criticize a superstition is not racism except if you really think that muslim or christian are races) .
They were the oposit of xenophobic (they were fighting against FN in France and agaisnt all racisms).
Here they just ask us if our right to blaspheme, witch is very important in France, should be abandoned in favor of fundamentalists of ANY religion.
I obviously don't know all of their work, I only know of their work that has come to light in the last 24h, you know much more on the subject than me. However, assessing what I have seen I cannot agree, they have shown religious prejudice, that is true, you have said it yourself. However, you are probably right about the rest of what you have said, but again, I am just judging my views on the information I know.
I can't say "Je suis Charlie" because I don't agree it's right to condone their work and don't want to be associated with it, but that definitely doesn't mean I don't think their murders were wrong. Their deaths were unjust but I don't think honouring their work is the way we should console ourselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jake Stothard @ January 8th 2015,19:19:22 ) I can't say "Je suis Charlie" because I don't agree it's right to condone their work and don't want to be associated with it, but that definitely doesn't mean I don't think their murders were wrong. Their deaths were unjust but I don't think honouring their work is the way we should console ourselves.
Nice double insurance there mate!
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Denis Vorontsov @ January 8th 2015,19:30:22 ) Nice double insurance there mate!
If I didn't make it perfectly clear someone would have tried to take my words the wrong way.
|
|
|
|
one simple case to separate terrorist from mulçumns is one question.
" do u kill someone for ur GOD? " simple
if the person say yes and is proposite to kill someone becase he belive something turns he on a terrorist. And here are the problem, because that pround and more the lie from they religion , they turn peoples who are a big danger.
if the person say no , all right , thats a good person have the same rights of all.
Its not time too feel afraid but too not time for war. One political move can be somethink interessent and necessary for the moment.
im just sayin this becase have some people who dont understand what a i really has said.
Im not racist with mulçumns , im againts terrorist who use they religion for practice terror on earth.
This for all religion of corse , the history teach us
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Never good to read this kind of news, I did cartoons for some years. When I was at high school I had a problem with a teacher who wanted to expulse me from high school for the cartoon where she appeared. she even told me to watch out my back and be careful, told me she was going to police and said some not nice things about my family. All the teachers were on my side and nothing happened by fortune.
Didn't understand that way of thinking then and can't understand it know so many years after...
Je suis Charlie!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bullets 12-0 Pencils
:(((((
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Dansk
Pirate
