Terrorist attacks and beheadings in France

[Kevbad the Bad]

Just about to have mine. I’ve been busy, but I see things haven’t changed much.

Since the 7th century.

 

[Athos]

but the cartoons

The cartoon doesn't ridicule anyone. The offence is that it depicts Muhammed.

 

[Spymaster]

... blancmange-brained moral relativist appeasers of the reactionary right.

I'm genuinely surprised that you can't see beyond this hogwash.

 

[Jay Park]

Showing pupils the material that's the subject matter of the discussion isn't gratuitous. Nor was anyone exposed to that material against their will.

so it’s okay for a teacher to ask students to sling it whilst he shows images that the publication of previously has led to appalling murderous acts

 

[butchersapron]

but the cartoons

Which cartoons? Are you being sluggish? Or just fucking lazy? The ones from Denmark a decade ago?

 

[butchersapron]

I'm genuinely surprised that you can't see beyond this hogwash.

Scratch a faux-authoritarian and you'll find the inner toxic-liberal.

 

[Jay Park]

Which cartoons? Are you being sluggish? Or just fucking lazy? The ones from Denmark a decade ago?

possibly either, but weren’t the images that the kids were confronted with of a similar nature?

 

[danny la rouge]

I'm genuinely surprised that you can't see beyond this hogwash.

I’m actually not at all surprised by your stance. I like you, but you’re always wrong on this issue. I’m more surprised by others in this thread.

 

[butchersapron]

possibly either, but weren’t the images that the kids were confronted with of a similar nature?

Oh FFS. It's in the thread that you're stinking out.

 

[Edie]

Can anyone post the cartoon here? Was it the one DLR posted earlier?

 

[butchersapron]

I’m actually not at all surprised by your stance. I like you, but you’re always wrong on this issue. I’m more surprised by others in this thread.

I like him too. but it's just not credible to suggest that this and his hang em high gruff speaking no-excuses panto dame are both real.

 

[butchersapron]

Can anyone post the cartoon here? Was it the one DLR posted earlier?

Yes, the nothing one.

But it doesn't matter which one it was does it? The offence is portrayal. So brainaddicts post above that he found a particular portrayal in a a thing nothing to do with CH offensive beyond irrelevant.

 

[Athos]

so it’s okay for a teacher to ask students to sling it whilst he shows images that the publication of previously has led to appalling murderous acts

He did nothing wrong whatsoever. In the context of a discussion about freedom of expression, he showed entirely relevant primary source material to those who wanted to see it. He didn't ask anyone to go; he offered them all all to opportunity to do so (briefly), should they so wish, to avoid them being offended. To imply he was at fault is to tacitly give legitimacy to murderous right wing religious fanatics.

 

[danny la rouge]

Can anyone post the cartoon here? Was it the one DLR posted earlier?

It was. Although reports suggest the father of a pupil spread false stories about what was shown.

 

[butchersapron]

It was. Although reports suggest the father of a pupil spread false stories about what was shown.

Which fundies on here have taken as real. Odd how that works. He def did this and showed that. I'm not in any way contributing to ANYTHING by saying that over and over.

 

[danny la rouge]

it’s okay for a teacher to ask students to sling it

It’s interesting that you and Spy choose to describe it that way. Isn’t is possible what he did was allow students the choice of whether they viewed the cartoon or not? That’s what was reported, and it’s not at all the way you depict it.

 

[Spymaster]

I’m actually not at all surprised by your stance. I like you, but you’re always wrong on this issue. I’m more surprised by others in this thread.

If anyone here could change my mind on this it would probably be you but we're so out of step on this it's not going to happen. If I was standing out here alone it might have given me something to think about but it seems so clear to me and others that showing the cartoons in this context was uncalled for. Your position that the guy was murdered and that's all there is to it is uncharacteristically short-sighted.

 

[Spymaster]

Can anyone post the cartoon here? Was it the one DLR posted earlier?

That was one of them. We don't know how many others were involved.

 

[Athos]

If anyone here could change my mind on this it would probably be you but we're so out of step on this it's not going to happen. If I was standing out here alone it might have given me something to think about but it seems so clear to me and others that showing the cartoons in this context was uncalled for. Your position that the guy was murdered and that's all there is to it is uncharacteristically short-sighted.

I don't think you understand Danny's position, to be honest.

 

[butchersapron]

That was one of them. We don't know how many others were involved.

Hah, i like the suggestion there may have been evil ones allied with the demand for truth of the lesson - after spending many posts characterising his lesson plan as anti muslim hate speech. All over the shop here. Happens when you switch roles i suppose.

 

[danny la rouge]

I don't think you understand Danny's position, to be honest.

I think he does, he just prefers not to have to think it through.

 

[butchersapron]

We don't know how many others were involved.

Classic SUN style smearing. Pathetic.

 

[Athos]

I think he does, he just prefers not to have to think it through.

I was giving him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Spymaster]

Hah, i like the suggestion there may have been evil ones allied with the demand for truth of the lesson - after spending many posts characterising his lesson plan as anti muslim hate speech.

Wow! It's like you're reading a different thread to me.

 

[butchersapron]

Wow! It's like you're reading a different thread to me.

Almost like you've been posting different stuff than you have been too.

You know. And you know that i know. It's the others you have to trick.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

If anyone here could change my mind on this it would probably be you but we're so out of step on this it's not going to happen. If I was standing out here alone it might have given me something to think about but it seems so clear to me and others that showing the cartoons in this context was uncalled for. Your position that the guy was murdered and that's all there is to it is uncharacteristically short-sighted.

Look at the language you've been using. Butchers is absolutely right to pull you up on it. You are blaming him even if you don't think you are, and you're repeatedly making massive unwarranted assumptions about how this lesson was taught. Even here - 'uncalled for'. You've already decided that this teacher was insensitive, and also that the students given the option to leave are victims - his victims, no less.

 

[Spymaster]

We don't know how many others were involved.

Don't be a tit. Edie asked if that was the picture used in the class. Multiple sources are citing "cartoons" (plural), so it's perfectly reasonable to assume there were others. I answered her question accurately.

 

[butchersapron]

Don't be a tit. Edie asked if that was the picture used in the class. Multiple sources are citing "cartoons" (plural), so it's perfectly reasonable to assume there were others. I answered her question accurately.

In a manner to suggest that other horrors were around the corner. S*N level shit.

Your 'involved' itself is judge jury and executioner. Involved. Means guilty. Guilty of doing a bad thing. Again, these are choices on your part.

 

[Spymaster]

In a manner to suggest that other horrors were around the corner.

In a manner to suggest that it was probably not the only one!

Fucking hell

 

[Spymaster]

In a manner to suggest that other horrors were around the corner.

In a manner to suggest that it was probably not the only one!

Fucking hell