Terrorist attacks and beheadings in France

[Kevbad the Bad]

.

I'd agree, the caricatures did look a bit dodgy, but I don't think the intent was to make racist cartoons but actually the opposite, to have a dig at racist stereotypes. But these things tend to have a life of their own and will get used by racists. Same with Alf Garnet - Johnny Speight's dig at racist working class Tories became a real racist folk hero and his sayings were a constant nightmare for many Black and Asian people living through the 60s and 70s in Britain. Any image, particularly satirical ones will always be perceived in various ways, used and misused, depending on the attitudes of the person viewing it.

So, back to the question, when and why did "the left" become a bastion of anti-blasphemy politics?

Don't loads of cartoons err on the dodgy side? Exaggerated facial features, exaggerated opinions, caricatures, stereotypes, cliches. To convey ideas in simple drawings almost necessitates it.

 

[tim]

But, if they weren't racist caricatures (big noses and turbans), you'd defend them, notwithstanding they'd still offend many simply by portraying Mohammed?

I doubt if I could be bothered to defend them, but I don't particularly care about offending religious sensibilities, even if I don't see the point in doing so.

What I don't see is why there is a need to acclaim the journalists at Charlie Hebdo as the Shaheed of the cause of secularism; and why I should respect rather than mock zealous secularist Jihadis.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

'zealous secularist Jihadis'

Here it is. As bad as each other, eh? Can you work out the ways that doesn't work?

You probably don't see how fucking offensive it is. But that's ok. Nobody's going to cut off your fucking head for it.

 

[Athos]

The right to cause deliberate offence is not a hill I’d die on, tbh, and I think nuance is important. Whilst I’d fiercely defend and encourage the right to challenge religious homophobia, I think people who write shit like TLTDNSIN, are being needlessly provocative and should think twice before doing it. That’s not to say I’d blame them for their murder if someone crucified them.

Your whole position turns on needlessness, which you've not really been able to articulate.

 

[Athos]

... zealous secularist Jihadis.

Wow.

 

[tim]

'zealous secularist Jihadis'

Here it is. As bad as each other, eh? Can you work out the ways that doesn't work?

You probably don't see how fucking offensive it is. But that's ok. Nobody's going to cut off your fucking head for it.

As absurd as anyone else who doesn't harm others in the cause of their faith. I don't think your bad in the sense of being dangerous and I wouldn't advocate you being sent of to be deradicalised.

Why should I care if you are offended anymore than you care about offending others?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Why should I care if you are offended anymore than you care about offending others?

You've reached a nirvana of relativist perfection.

 

[wemakeyousoundb]

Several according to some newspaper reports.

I was reading 7 arrests with 6 charged in french papers this morning and saw a quick mention of the killer apparently having started to froth at the twitter after the stabbings outside CH last month just before the trial started.
e2a: actually that was an article from Tuesday. 2 teenagers charged with pointing him out for money :/

 

[danny la rouge]

why I should respect rather than mock zealous secularist Jihadis.

Who are they? They sound right bloodthirsty pricks.

 

[Serge Forward]

What I don't see is why there is a need to acclaim the journalists at Charlie Hebdo as the Shaheed of the cause of secularism; and why I should respect rather than mock zealous secularist Jihadis.

No need to because no one here has acclaimed anything of the sort. The rest of your sentence is just too fucked up to respond to.

 

[Spymaster]

Your whole position turns on needlessness, which you've not really been able to articulate.

I disagree again. If I were to say to you that the homophobic elements of your religion stink, and argue against them, it would be justifiable criticism. If I were to say to you, your entire religion stinks, you’re a fuckwit, and by the way here’s a poem about a Roman sucking-off Christ’s corpse, that would be needlessly provocative.

 

[tim]

So, back to the question, when and why did "the left" become a bastion of anti-blasphemy politics?

In stupidity like this

Who are they? They sound right bloodthirsty pricks.

Jihad doesn't have to be violent

Edited: I was posting on the DLR and two intended posts seem to have merged. The example of stupidity I was giving Serge Forward was not danny la rouge - sorry.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I disagree again. If I were to say to you that the homophobic elements of your religion stink, and argue against them, it would be justifiable criticism. If I were to say to you, your entire religion stinks, you’re a fuckwit, and by the way here’s a poem about a Roman sucking-off Christ’s corpse, that would be needlessly provocative.

How about religious types who preach that homosexuals are sinners and will burn in hell? Is that not needlessly provocative? Who are you or I or anybody else to prescribe what is an appropriate response to such hateful provocation?

I hate what you are, but you shouldn't be rude about my hatred. Pretty fucked up, but that's the place you're arguing from.

 

[danny la rouge]

Jihad doesn't have to be violent

Indeed it doesn’t. But that’s not the same for the term “Jihadi”, is it?

 

[danny la rouge]

You still haven’t told us who these secular jihadis are, tim

 

[Spymaster]

How about religious types who preach that homosexuals are sinners and will burn in hell? Is that not needlessly provocative? Who are you or I or anybody else to prescribe what is an appropriate response to such hateful provocation?

Yes. But as you’ve argued they have a right to say it. That doesn’t mean I can’t be critical of them for saying it and think the world would be a better place if they kept their shitty opinions to themselves, and I certainly wouldn’t say that they were to blame if someone killed them for it.

 

[xenon]

In stupidity like this



Jihad doesn't have to be violent

sophistry. You knew very well what invoking that phrase meant. You weren’t simply talking about it as a synonym for struggle.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You still haven’t told us who these secular jihadis are, tim

???

 

[danny la rouge]

They surely do.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes. But as you’ve argued they have a right to say it. That doesn’t mean I can’t be critical of them for saying it and think the world would be a better place if they kept their shitty opinions to themselves, and I certainly wouldn’t say that they were to blame if someone killed them for it.

Now you've lost me rather.

You would respond to someone being rude about a religion whose leaders teach its followers to hate people like them that they have a 'shitty opinion' and that they should keep quiet about it?

 

[Jay Park]

Back in the day, the left (excluding those who still argued "homosexuality is a bourgeois deviation") were all over this Whitehouse v Lemon - Wikipedia And Whitehouse only took the publication to court.

I liked it when blasphemy was generally considered a good thing on the left.

Edit: Oh, and before anyon says its different because CH were being racist, it's been pretty much established they weren't. Edgy and a bit shit, yes, but not actually racist.

needlessly antagonistic also

 

[Jay Park]

Now you've lost me rather.

You would respond to someone being rude about a religion whose leaders teach its followers to hate people like them that they have a 'shitty opinion' and that they should keep quiet about it?

painting in broad strokes there, love

 

[Athos]

I disagree again. If I were to say to you that the homophobic elements of your religion stink, and argue against them, it would be justifiable criticism. If I were to say to you, your entire religion stinks, you’re a fuckwit, and by the way here’s a poem about a Roman sucking-off Christ’s corpse, that would be needlessly provocative.

Giving an example isn't the same as being able to define something.

Essentially, your position boils down to the idea that people should have the freedom to say stuff you agree with, and if they get killed for saying something you and others find 'needlessly provocative' (something you can't define), that's to be expected (albeit you don't support it).

 

[Smokeandsteam]

I was reading 7 arrests with 6 charged in french papers this morning and saw a quick mention of the killer apparently having started to froth at the twitter after the stabbings outside CH last month just before the trial started.
e2a: actually that was an article from Tuesday. 2 teenagers charged with pointing him out for money :/

I understand a parent - who’s kid wasn't in the class but he was offended on behalf of those who were - is one of those arrested. Two kids who sat with the killer for hours waiting to identify the worker have also been pulled. Who are the others?

 

[Idris2002]

This is interesting:
"

Full image here:

Spoiler

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I understand a parent - who’s kid wasn't in the class but he was offended on behalf of those who were - is one of those arrested. Two kids who sat with the killer for hours waiting to identify the worker have also been pulled. Who are the others?

This article also says seven - that parent, Brahim C, and the kids, but doesn't say who else.

And as ever, the hatred and violence were organised and encouraged by Islamist shitstirrers.

An activist known to French intelligence, Abdelhakim Sefrioui, attended a meeting at the school with Brahim C. and also encouraged the social media campaign, that went viral.

Sefrioui "presented as a religious authority" in social media posts, Ricard said.

Don't know if he's another of those arrested. If they've found him, he surely must be.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

I understand a parent - who’s kid wasn't in the class but he was offended on behalf of those who were - is one of those arrested. Two kids who sat with the killer for hours waiting to identify the worker have also been pulled. Who are the others?

Apparently the killer's parents, grandfather and brother.

 

[Idris2002]

How much of that is just the French state trying to be seen to be doing something?

 

[wemakeyousoundb]

I understand a parent - who’s kid wasn't in the class but he was offended on behalf of those who were - is one of those arrested. Two kids who sat with the killer for hours waiting to identify the worker have also been pulled. Who are the others?

one of the killer's friend who was with him when he bought the knife and another friend who drove him to where it happened, also a salafo-djihadist activist who encouraged the pupil father to whip up his online campaign.
75% of the article is behing a paywall though but the short version makes it look like the killer had been looking for potential targets even before this story started.

 

[Saul Goodman]

one of the killer's friend who was with him when he bought the knife and another friend who drove him to where it happened, also a salafo-djihadist activist who encouraged the pupil father to whip up his online campaign.
75% of the article is behing a paywall though but the short version makes it look like the killer had been looking for potential targets even before this story started.

I think anyone fucked up enough to hack someones head off is probably looking for a victim. If it wasn't this teacher it would have been someone else who didn't agree with his views.