Terrorist attacks and beheadings in France

[tim]

The approach to building alliances in the video above gives an indication of why.

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

See above for why.

 

[tim]

.

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.

If only Julius Streicher's lawyer had thought of that Defence at Nuremberg.

 

[JimW]

Another problem for me is I think the CH cartoons are French liberal society speaking to itself primarily and then wider French political society second with Muslim French people only a minor consideration. So this constant breaking of the taboo of picturing Mohammed might work well as a reminder to the secular French state to stay that way (fair enough) but it's not really any sort of engagement with the people who's taboo is being broken to make that point, they're collateral. Partly serves you right for having a taboo but also strikes me as leaving practising Muslims in France as marginal to a conversation that is in many ways about them.
Ultimately, tough shit to go with all the rest you have, but still different to the same conversation in a mainly Muslim polity. I think I just don't like smug provocateurs (which is how the style comes over to me) who end up punching down, even if by accident.
Genuinely don't think any of that offers the slightest justification for the murder, of course it's the reverse; if cunts like that want you cowering before their violence they should probably include the cartoons as inserts into every piece of printed material in the country because it's no longer just an intra-liberal spat or a question of taste.

 

[Kevbad the Bad]

If only Julius Streicher's lawyer had thought of that Defence at Nuremberg.

He wasn't on trial for cartoons. Crimes against humanity, iirc.

 

[tim]

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

Somewhere up the thread there is the bit about the Chinese getting it right by banning anyone going inside a church before the age of 18
Paris Teacher Beheaded

And this gem
Paris Teacher Beheaded

 

[tim]

[

.. you can't make an umlaut without using dots

 

[danny la rouge]

Somewhere up the thread there is the bit about the Chinese getting it right by banning anyone going inside a church before the age of 18
Paris Teacher Beheaded

And this gem
Paris Teacher Beheaded

I see.

Not as if they are being taken seriously though.

Give it a rest, Saul. It’s a daft idea and not the place to discuss it.

 

[tim]

He wasn't on trial for cartoons. Crimes against humanity, iirc.

In part he was which is why he said this at his trial.


"The prosecution had asserted that mass killings [of Jews] could not have been possible without Streicher and his Sturmer. The prosecution neither offered nor submitted any proof of this assertion. . ."

Julius Streicher "Jew-Baiter Number One"

Welcome to Famous Trials, the Web’s largest and most visited collection of original essays, trial transcripts and exhibits, maps, images, and other materials relating to the greatest trials in world history. “Famous Trials” first appeared on the Web in 1995, making this site older than about...

famous-trials.com

 

[Saul Goodman]

I see.

Not as if they are being taken seriously though.

You only have to look at the time of the post to realise I was pissed and posting bollocks

 

[two sheds]

You only have to look at the time of the post to realise I was pissed and posting bollocks

/notes that one down for future use

 

[tim]

You only have to look at the time of the post to realise I was pissed and posting bollocks

In vino veritas

 

[Saul Goodman]

/notes that one down for future use

Probably best to just ignore everything I post after 11pm, as its most likely bollocks

 

[two sheds]

/keeps taking notes

 

[kabbes]

I'm examining where your limits on freedom of speech/expression are. I think we've established that you don't believe in absolute freedom of expression and believe that there are limits. The question is where do you set the boundaries.

You've repeatedly accused me and others of blaming the Hebdo guys for their murders and equated them not doing what they did with appeasement of fundamentalism. I know that you disagree with, and are critical of, people becoming police officers so do you blame Keith Palmer for his murder? After all if he hadn't joined the police he wouldn't have been killed.

The difference, Spy, is that LBJ isn’t making a thread about the death of Keith Palmer in order to criticise the actions of police officers. He’s criticising police officers in the context of actions where police officers are the antagonists, not the victims. He didn’t start a thread saying, “I wouldn’t have wanted this guy to die but hey, being a police officer is unwisely inflammatory, so you know, there’s that.” He’s not using Keith Palmer’s actions at the time of his death as an example of the police doing wrong.

 

[bimble]

Thread is kind of gratutiously offensive imo, have a convo about the limits of freedom of speech great but not in a thread about a man who had pictures of his severed head posted up on the internet. He was a teacher not a soldier.

 

[Spymaster]

The difference, Spy, is that LBJ isn’t making a thread about the death of Keith Palmer in order to criticise the actions of police officers.

Hang on. This thread isn't about the death of Samuel Paty. It's about (or was intended to be about) the use of arguably racist cartoons as teaching aids to a class containing Muslims and creating the divison that was being discussed. The death of Paty was the event that raised the issue but it would be a very different one if that was its primary purpose. We'd all have just agreed that the murderers were cunts, I'd probably have contended that they should all hang and we'd be having a CP discussion or a rerun of the Shamima Begum thread.

 

[Kevbad the Bad]

Hang on. This thread isn't about the death of Samuel Paty. It's about (or was about) the use of arguably racist cartoons as teaching aids to a class containing Muslims and creating the divison that was being discussed. The death of Paty was the event that raised the issue but it would be a very different one if that was its primary purpose. We'd all have just agreed that the murderers were cunts, I'd probably have contended that they should all hang and we'd be having a CP discussion.

Paris teacher beheaded.

 

[Spymaster]

Paris teacher beheaded.

That was the news headline. Read the OP.

 

[kabbes]

Hang on. This thread isn't about the death of Samuel Paty. It's about (or was about) the use of arguably racist cartoons as teaching aids to a class containing Muslims and creating the divison that was being discussed. The death of Paty was the event that raised the issue but it would be a very different one if that was its primary purpose. We'd all have just agreed that the murderers were cunts, I'd probably have contended that they should all hang and we'd be having a CP discussion.

You could have chosen any one of a large number of contexts to talk about cartoons and you could have started it in the education forum if you wanted to discuss cartoons and education. Instead, you put the whole thing specifically in the context of a murdered man, as a current event in the politics forum, to point out this is what happens to you if you aren’t careful. And now you want to equate that with somebody criticising the police in the context of police action where they are the aggressor not the victim? Can you not even begin to see that context is everything? There is no such thing as objective neutrality, no such thing as a debate in a vacuum.

 

[Spymaster]

You could have chosen any one of a large number of contexts to talk about cartoons and you could have started it in the education forum if you wanted to discuss cartoons and education. Instead, you put the whole thing specifically in the context of a murdered man, as a current event in the politics forum ...

I wouldn't have thought about it if it weren't for the murder but if you're having a pop at me for putting it in the wrong forum. Ok. Hands up. You got me there.

... to point out this is what happens to you if you aren’t careful.

Bullshit.

And now you want to equate that with somebody criticising the police in the context of police action where they are the aggressor not the victim?.

I disapprove (for want of another word) of this type of satire or the material being used in this way for multiple reasons. LBJ and others here disapprove of people joining the police force for multiple reasons. However, I am no more blaming Paty and Hebdo for their murders than LBJ is blaming Palmer for his.

 

[kabbes]

So you are contending what? Your observations are free of context? The context doesn’t matter?

 

[Spymaster]

So you are contending what?

That it's possible to discuss issues highlighted/raised by this case other than everyone simply posting reams of condemnation of the murder which is so obvious that it doesn't need pointing out.

 

[Saul Goodman]

I don't see why it's OK to mock people who believe in fairies but not people who believe in other mythical beings.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

According to this, Paty said that he hadn't asked the students to leave, merely to look away if they were offended. Spoiler alert, whatever. Just that. He showed two CH cartoons and others, so it wasn't just about CH and depicting Mo, it was broader than that. And he didn't show the one of Mo bending over with his cock and balls showing.

And of course why did they end up with a story of him showing the images of naked mo? Cos either the girl who wasn't there or her dad were so offended by the idea of depicting Mo and seeing those depictions that they must have googled them to have a good look through.

Citing police sources, French media reported on Wednesday that Paty had told police investigating a formal complaint by the parent, the father of a girl at the school who did not attend Paty’s class, that he had not, as claimed, asked Muslim pupils to leave.

“I said I was going to show the two cartoons, and any pupil who thought they might find them offensive could look away,” the teacher reportedly said. The cartoons were shown alongside others of different subjects as part of a class on free expression.

Spy, for this at least, you have a bit of self-correcting to do. At various points, you've suggested that he did far more than this. You've called his teaching gratuitous and various other crappy things.

It would appear that the initial versions of what happened contained information taken at least in part from the hate campaign against him.

 

[bimble]

I don't see why it's OK to mock people who believe in fairies but not people who believe in other mythical beings.

Because fairy-worshippers don't chop people's heads off. Nobody worries much about offending Jains do they.

 

[JimW]

I don't see why it's OK to mock people who believe in fairies but not people who believe in other mythical beings.

Social basis of the belief for me; if the belief in fairies came in a package with something you were born into in a marginalised community and that something provided some semblance of an identity and solidarity I might think twice before launching into a spiel on how silly it all was. Same as I don't start banging on to house Christians and folk Buddhists I meet here, usually people on the margins looking for something, though if they want to talk about it I'll tell them why I don't believe and don't think they should.

 

[Serge Forward]

Hang on. This thread isn't about the death of Samuel Paty. It's about (or was intended to be about) the use of arguably racist cartoons as teaching aids to a class containing Muslims and creating the divison that was being discussed. The death of Paty was the event that raised the issue but it would be a very different one if that was its primary purpose. We'd all have just agreed that the murderers were cunts, I'd probably have contended that they should all hang and we'd be having a CP discussion.

Thing is, the cartoons did not "offend" the murderer and his collaborators because they were considered racist, the offense was due to far right Muslims deciding they were blasphemous and the teacher should be horribly killed in such a way as to shock and offend anyone with an ounce of humanity.

 

[Spymaster]

According to this, Paty said that he hadn't asked the students to leave, merely to look away if they were offended. Spoiler alert, whatever. Just that. He showed two CH cartoons and others, so it wasn't just about CH and depicting Mo, it was broader than that. And he didn't show the one of Mo bending over with his cock and balls showing.

And of course why did they end up with a story of him showing the images of naked mo? Cos either the girl who wasn't there or her dad were so offended by the idea of depicting Mo and seeing those depictions that they must have googled them to have a good look through.



Spy, for this at least, you have a bit of self-correcting to do. At various points, you've suggested that he did far more than this. You've called his teaching gratuitous and various other crappy things.

I maintain that Hebdo is shit satire and I don't think it should be used in classes containing Muslims for all the reasons that have been discussed on the thread. Happy to self-correct on any items that I quoted from the contemporaneous reporting that have since been proven wrong or innaccurate.

 

[Spymaster]

Thing is, the cartoons did not "offend" the murderer and his collaborators because they were considered racist, the offense was due to far right Muslims deciding they were blasphemous and the teacher should be horribly killed in such a way as to shock and offend anyone with an ounce of humanity.

This is neither here nor there in the intended context of the thread. I wasn't seeking a discussion on why Paty was killed, but one on whether cartoons like that should be used in classes and Muslim kids be asked to self identify.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

You haven't given two equivalent scenarios. As you well know.

A religious equivalent to someone shouting racist abuse in the street in Brixton would be someone walking into a Mosque in the middle of Friday prayers to shout a load of anti-Islam stuff at the worshipers. Believe it or not, I wouldn't be defending someone's right to do that.

Yeah, pa, but what about if it was performance art?