I do condemn the attack that happened in Paris yesterday.As far as replies in that thread are concerned,all have condemned and protested.All news papers criticized it.All are of the opinion that media should not be silenced and this was an attack on the free press,freedom of expression etc
May those souls Rest In Peace.
But I would like to ask a few very simple questions…
Why did that magazine choose to publish cartoons making mockery of a figure ,whom people of one of the largest religions in the world,respect and revere?
Why did not the French authorities take any actions on the magazine management in the very beginning itself?
Can any magazine/publishers be given such free reins,in the name of freedom of expression?
Forget about Mr.Baghdadi.He is a person of no importance.But somebody is hurting the religious sentiments of some people,then they turn violent and after all the mayhem there is call and scream for freedom of expression.Ofcourse the perpetrators of this heinous crime should be booked under the Law.But the actions of the management of the magazine undermined the safety not only of theirs but others aswell.
I do not know how many people will throw stones at me here.But I wanted to ask this…
The French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo attacked by terrorists Wednesday in Paris had a history of publishing controversial cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad that angered Muslim leaders in France, the Middle East and other parts of the world. The magazine for years received threats from social media users because depictions of the prophet are forbidden in Islam.
At least 12 people were killed Wednesday after gunmen stormed Charlie Hebdo’s central Paris office, prompting France to raise its terror threat level. “We will find the people who did this,” French President François Hollande said. “France is today shocked by this terrorist attack.”
In 2012, France temporarily closed its embassies and schools in more than 20 countries to prevent potential terrorism attacks because of Charlie Hebdo’s Prophet Muhammad cartoons. Stéphane Charbonnier, then-director of the French magazine, said at the time that his staff was “not really fueling the fire” but rather using its freedom of expression “to comment (on) the news in a satirical way.”
In 2011, the magazine was attacked by a petrol bomb after it ran a special Arab Spring edition entitled “Sharia Hebdo” that included a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad on the cover as “guest editor.” It read, “100 lashes if you don’t die of laughter!”
In 2007, a Paris court dismissed a lawsuit filed by two Muslim organizations to sue the paper for representing the Prophet Muhammad in cartoons. In 2006, the French Council for the Muslim Faith brought a lawsuit against Charlie Hebdo for publishing caricatures of the prophet.
“Just because Muslims refuse to portray the prophet, there’s no reason why non-Muslims should feel compelled by the same restrictions and fear retribution if they go ahead with picturing Islam’s founder,” the Independent wrote in 2013.
France has the largest Muslim population in Western Europe, with roughly 4.7 million followers of the faith. Amid growing tensions between Muslims and other French residents, France banned the wearing of Islamic veils and other face coverings in 2011.
They didnt make the cartoons, they published the cartoons which were originally made by a dutch cartoonist. The editor and the magazine have published cartoons making fun of Christianity and Judaism as well. Most of the staff which worked there were atheists.
But I would like to ask a few very simple questions...
Why did that magazine choose to publish cartoons making mockery of a figure ,whom people of one of the largest religions in the world,respect and revere?
Why did not the French authorities take any actions on the magazine management in the very beginning itself?
Can any magazine/publishers be given such free reins,in the name of freedom of expression?
*Disclaimer: Its heart breaking when some one takes a life. Here 12 people were killed. *
Now to your questions.
Its a war/incident (or in urdu jharap) between extremists on muslims side and extremists on secular sided.
Common people get played with. As they are since the dawn of "free" market etc etc..
Common people of France think they are supporting freedom of speech...which they are told is very dear to them.
I want to see when anger settles down, how would people react to following information.
This news REPRINTED prophets cartoons. When they were asked(my info comes from democracynow.org(the only balanced source of information))
So when this newsgroup/magazine was asked,
about if they would print cartoons of mosses(as) (prophet/founder of jews... and prophet of islam)
magazine respond."*no they would not have publish similar attack agains mosses regardless of his role was in doing Palestine *."
So in this case foredoom so speech looks like, some thing between hate speech and picking on voulerable of their society.
O.K. But why did they choose to re publish it?Again in the news link that I have given above,it says they chose to publish Prophet Mohammed in the magazine cover in a comical manner.Even the depiction is not allowed,and they chose to do it in a weird manner.
This is the news:-
The French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo attacked by terrorists Wednesday in Paris had a history of publishing controversial cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad that angered Muslim leaders in France, the Middle East and other parts of the world. The magazine for years received threats from social media users because depictions of the prophet are forbidden in Islam.
At least 12 people were killed Wednesday after gunmen stormed Charlie Hebdo’s central Paris office, prompting France to raise its terror threat level. “We will find the people who did this,” French President François Hollande said. “France is today shocked by this terrorist attack.”
In 2012, France temporarily closed its embassies and schools in more than 20 countries to prevent potential terrorism attacks because of Charlie Hebdo’s Prophet Muhammad cartoons. Stéphane Charbonnier, then-director of the French magazine, said at the time that his staff was “not really fueling the fire” but rather using its freedom of expression “to comment (on) the news in a satirical way.”
In 2011, the magazine was attacked by a petrol bomb after it ran a special Arab Spring edition entitled “Sharia Hebdo” that included a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad on the cover as “guest editor.” It read, “100 lashes if you don’t die of laughter!”
They being atheist does not entitle them to harass any religion/religious figures...Right?
They didnt make the cartoons, they published the cartoons which were originally made by a dutch cartoonist. The editor and the magazine have published cartoons making fun of Christianity and Judaism as well. Most of the staff which worked there were atheists.
they did post other cartoons on the topic - an issue was "guest edited by Prophet Mohammad".
its nothing short of a clash of cultures. their latest issue has the virgin mary giving birth to baby jesus drawn in a very irreverent way right on the cover page. no one's bothered.
The logical way of fighting such provocative cartoons is to ignore them and demonstrate maturity to the world. Today these idiots trying to defend the prophet have created a million new Charlie Hebdo's. Now who is going to silence them?
Im guessing that the next issue of Charlie Hebdo is going to see unprecedented sales.
I am surprised , how these people live in west , work there , earn there
That is a Sudi , free society , Lot of money belong to wine , pig and other haram industry
If there is money is halal for us , we should respect their law
Otherwise come back to Somalia , Nigeria or Pakistan
Why did that magazine choose to publish cartoons making mockery of a figure ,whom people of one of the largest religions in the world,respect and revere?
Why did not the French authorities take any actions on the magazine management in the very beginning itself?
Can any magazine/publishers be given such free reins,in the name of freedom of expression?
To answer this, you need to consider the culture & self-identity of France. It is a country where nothing is sacred - literally. The French state struggled against its most powerful religion (the Catholic Church) at the turn of the 19th/20th, and ended up eliminating it from the public sphere. All Church schools were closed, church property was confiscated, soldiers and government officials were spied on and denied promotions if they attended religious practices.
While things are not quite as harsh now, this was the foundation of the modern French state and general culture. It is by nature opposed to the concept of concession to religion.
They being atheist does not entitle them to harass any religion/religious figures...Right?
It's their country, so they arrogate upon themselves whatever entitlement they want...no?
Their notion of freedom is more important to them than causing grave offense to the world's Muslims. They know the cartoons incite and provoke...but they'd rather tell us how it shouldn't than understand why. But that, I suggest, is something we need to live with in an ever shrinking world.
All these cartoons do is kill support for free speech in a part of the world that really doesn't have buy in to it. Sets us up for an ideological rift that is zero sum. So be it.
they did post other cartoons on the topic - an issue was "guest edited by Prophet Mohammad".
its nothing short of a clash of cultures. their latest issue has the virgin mary giving birth to baby jesus drawn in a very irreverent way right on the cover page. no one's bothered.
Plenty of people are bothered...but then, it's not exactly the right time to say that this particular magazine is the mutated, brain-dead, *******-child of free speech rather than a high expression of it. Is it?
The quandary is for those ideologically predisposed to support free speech at all cost...they need to abstract away the actual content they are protecting. The rest of the world simply wouldn't allow it, or would have no problems prosecuting those who published such outlandish retardation that serves no purpose other than to offend. Free-enough speech, perhaps?
To answer this, you need to consider the culture & self-identity of France. It is a country where nothing is sacred - literally. The French state struggled against its most powerful religion (the Catholic Church) at the turn of the 19th/20th, and ended up eliminating it from the public sphere. All Church schools were closed, church property was confiscated, soldiers and government officials were spied on and denied promotions if they attended religious practices.
While things are not quite as harsh now, this was the foundation of the modern French state and general culture. It is by nature opposed to the concept of concession to religion.
