Re: Paris: Charlie Hebdo shooting

by rwo power Thu Jan 15, 2015 2:51 am

RealGunner wrote:But to create such hatred between two diverse groups(wasn't their intention) which will intensify over the next 20 years with more incidents like this.

Actually the hatred was created by the Imams who took pictures from a remote and beforehand totally insignificant and unknown Danish newspaper that would have been forgotten the next week and never got public worldwide and copied them millions of times to rally their followers into some holy rage.

From then on things started to get a life on their own. You know, the Streisand effect. If they just would have ignored the issue of the Jyllands Posten, then nothing would have happened and no one would have been hurt.

So I wonder what really were the intentions of these imams who actually started the hatred and violence. The people listening to them never ever would have gotten notice of the caricatures in the first hand and I bet many of them wouldn't actually have bothered even if they had heard of them by someone else than their leaders who told them what outrage it was and that they should act violently against the perpetrators.

by RealGunner Thu Jan 15, 2015 2:53 am

Robespierre wrote:Anyway the radical Islam has a precise identity : the Wahhabism.
A radical vision of Islam, the state religion in Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaeda was born from there, the " self-styled " Islamic state as well.
We cannot mention the fact that the West, in name of " pecunia non olet " and the principle of profit to reign on everything it plays dumb about the fact there are Saudits behind it . Of course it doesn't mean the Western must bomb Riad tomorrow , but it should make clear to these people, always messed (just seeing how it is organized their "state") that the situation cannot longer be tolerated.
I don't care if American fighter planes to bomb Saddam departed from Arabia,
the West can no longer afford to keep a foot in both camps in the name of capitalism and profit.
The West ( and unfortunately Europe is tied hands and feet because of Bush father and jr . and for other choices definitely not farsighted ) must assume own responsibilities.
The Saudi Arabia can't be considered anymore an ally of the West.

+1

Great post mate.

Dante wrote:It's obvious you're concerned with the greater good RG and that's commentable . Of course when it comes to that , we should always take into consideration what we say , or what we do. I understand that , i really do . Mind you and i want to believe you understand this , people don't just wake up in the morning JUST to upset religious persons or religions in general. When there's satire or critique , there's most always a reason why. You don't see the French satirizing Buddha for instance , that's because they don't have a good reason maybe?? Similarly and personally , i am not sure how i pass my image to you (all) , but ironicaly i've found myself defending Muslims against Christians at times . I'm not mindlessly against religion . I want them to have their mosques or what they need to pray here in Greece and i have defended them for this , for the obvious right the Christians have ffs , i want that for the Muslims who live here. Just as i have no relations to anything Muslim and defend them on this , i will satirize them if i must. I will mock them if i must but most importantly , where i feel i must. Not just because , or just to upset people. And most atheists and critiques against religion base their case on arguments , it's not mindless insults or what have you.

The 2nd part of your post i find it really hard to disagree about pretty much anything. But since you are asking what's really worth , i'd still say being free to satirize , or speak against , or what have you against Islam (since that's what we talk here) . In the grand scheme of things , to what we will leave to the next generations , it does worth more than avoiding conflict. I understand what i say here tbh , it's not just words. I don't know the full consequences these events will have in the future.

But as far as i am concerned , freedom is above all else and this includes religions too , all of them and their people . The greatest ideal we have , which i am not willing to concede in the slightest in about any of its forms , for pretty much any reason , not just religion . I think it was worth it , knowing full well what it cost. Or what it may cost in the future.

Glad you understood my point.

Of course everyone has the freedom of speech and should use it. But I personally don't like when it's being used for the wrong reasons. That's where my problem lies with freedom of speech. The grey area between hate speech and freedom of speech. I had a massive debate with RO few months back on the point that humans are inherently evil(evil in a broad sense not religious), he disagreed with some great points and he probably was right. But I still maintain that people will abuse their freedom of speech by using it for the wrong reasons. And this is not related to the french magazine thing btw. Just something I wanted to say.

VivaStPauli wrote:
BarrileteCosmico wrote:
VivaStPauli wrote:And don't give me that "minority" shit, a minority can't keep an entire gender disenfranchised.
Let's not pretend that every Muslim woman is disenfranchised... Catholic women still can't even become priests or have a position of real leadership within the church.

And I don't really expect revolution to start because of my words.

I just think it's worth pointing out that literally everywhere there's a thousand problems more pressing than "there's this tiny paper publishing cartoons", even though some people keep circling back to the argument that the "provocation" was the problem.

You know, it's the "she was dressed provocatively" of international relations. Infuriating.

Great point. One of the thing I absolutely hate in the religious community.

by VivaStPauli Thu Jan 15, 2015 3:01 am

While often Sepi is a bit blunt for my tastes, this sentence is something I will wholeheartedly sign, and agree with:

Natalie Portman wrote:Religion is not Race. Religion is a choice. Anything that is a choice is open to be mocked and criticized. Because you DO have control over it.

by DuringTheWar Thu Jan 15, 2015 3:02 am

Natalie Portman wrote:
The great Hitchens...I'll start an appreciation thread for him when time is right. What a visionary. Kudos to Lenin also for creating the first secular gov't in modern history and the first modern gov't to recognize gay rights.

Hitchens seemed like a nice chap tbf. Not sure about the Lenin lad though http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheka#Atrocities

Anyway just need to read my signature for his input on this topic lol

by RealGunner Thu Jan 15, 2015 3:03 am

rwo power wrote:
RealGunner wrote:But to create such hatred between two diverse groups(wasn't their intention) which will intensify over the next 20 years with more incidents like this.
Actually the hatred was created by the Imams who took pictures from a remote and beforehand totally insignificant and unknown Danish newspaper that would have been forgotten the next week and never got public worldwide and copied them millions of times to rally their followers into some holy rage.

From then on things started to get a life on their own. You know, the Streisand effect. If they just would have ignored the issue of the Jyllands Posten, then nothing would have happened and no one would have been hurt.

So I wonder what really were the intentions of these imams who actually started the hatred and violence. The people listening to them never ever would have gotten notice of the caricatures in the first hand and I bet many of them wouldn't actually have bothered even if they had heard of them by someone else than their leaders who told them what outrage it was and that they should act violently against the perpetrators.

That's actually a mild version of how people are brainwashed into extremism. A man, unable to think for himself will think the higher cleric knows everything. If he is promised non existent 72 virgins for murdering an innocent person. He will do it without questioning himself or the person. I don't know if it's his fault for being an idiot or his circumstances. But that's literally how things work in most areas where extremists are recruited.

I don't know why that Imam decided to do what he did. Maybe he believed he had a duty to inform the mass about what's going on. or Maybe he just wanted to provoke people into achieving something. Whatever he thought, he just helped the magazine rise in popularity.

by VivaStPauli Thu Jan 15, 2015 3:24 am

That's the point. Those caricatures were instrumentalized, and are not the "root of the problem", as some would have you believe. It was pretty calculated outrage TBH, and it's sad that people still bow to it.

by FennecFox7 Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:27 am

I'm gonna add that you guys are only looking at the book by its cover. The west isn't entirely innocent in this. Although shooting people down because they didn't agree with an illustration is evil and backwards, I agree. But, lets not act like MENA is left alone by the west Laughing

by guest_07 Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:27 am

rwo power wrote:
guest_07 wrote:you tackle the root, that problem should never exist in the first place

The interesting question is - what is the root? Is it the insult or the idea that caricatures with that topic are evil?

Maybe the root is that people should rethink and not consider this kind of caricatures insulting, but thought-provoking?

Everything has two sides after all.

you can criticize other religion with more polite method

i don't think that caricature was belong into polite method

that is the root of the problem

the "freedom" of "speech" fighter choose the non polite method which can be considered not a wise act

by VivaStPauli Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:33 am

So it's okay to go shooting people like it's cool just because of cartoons?

by Guest Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:34 am

I can't believe they detained Dieudonné over that Facebook post Laughing

Good job making a martyr over that clown.

by guest_07 Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:35 am

the problem is, the westerner know by doing this insulting or provoking act, they can turn:

1) the moderate muslim into radical one

2) the radical muslim into taking action

well done the westerner, good job there

then the world will become more "peace" thanks for the westerner "effort"

by guest_07 Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:37 am

is so hard for westerner to criticize other religion without insulting or provoking?

i'm curious?

by VivaStPauli Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:42 am

Just because we know that it causes idiots to commit crimes, it doesn't mean it's the root of the problem.

If there's a psychopath, frothing at the mouth, and muttering gibberish about how green M&Ms are the devil's staple food, does that really make it wrong to eat green M&Ms just so psychopaths don't kill you?

Seems to me that psychopath needs some downers, and a bit of therapy, and if it wasn't the green M&Ms he'd probably be murdering people for eating blue M&Ms, or for preferring skittles, because those are the candy of sin.

We can't just stop press freedom because some primitive hill people get upset by it.

by guest_07 Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:50 am

VivaStPauli wrote:Just because we know that it causes idiots to commit crimes, it doesn't mean it's the root of the problem.

If there's a psychopath, frothing at the mouth, and muttering gibberish about how green M&Ms are the devil's staple food, does that really make it wrong to eat green M&Ms just so psychopaths don't kill you?

Seems to me that psychopath needs some downers, and a bit of therapy, and if it wasn't the green M&Ms he'd probably be murdering people for eating blue M&Ms, or for preferring skittles, because those are the candy of sin.

We can't just stop press freedom because some primitive hill people get upset by it.

you westerner still don't answer the question,

is so hard for westerner to criticize other religion without insulting or provoking?

why choose the method that others can't accept

if you want to criticize other religion, do the debate, that is one of the solution

by VivaStPauli Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:16 am

Because the "offense" is completely arbitrary and rests in the mind of the "offended", might as well be green M&Ms. Doesn't matter what we do. As long as we don't subject ourselves to their idiotic theocracy, we will be some sort of target for some nutjob.

by BarrileteCosmico Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:28 am

It's a satirical newspaper. By definition it will be insulting:

Merriam Webster wrote:Artistic form in which human or individual vices, folly, abuses, or shortcomings are held up to censure by means of ridicule, derision, burlesque, irony, or other methods, sometimes with an intent to bring about improvement. Literature and drama are its chief vehicles, but it is also found in such mediums as film, the visual arts (e.g., caricatures), and political cartoons.

It's not as if every westerner making a criticism of Muslims does it in an insulting way, but people practicing satire, especially of tabboo subjects, will inevitably do so in a way that some find insulting. It's important they be allowed to do so without reasonable expectation that will be killed for it.

by guest_07 Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:43 am

VivaStPauli wrote:Because the "offense" is completely arbitrary and rests in the mind of the "offended", might as well be green M&Ms. Doesn't matter what we do. As long as we don't subject ourselves to their idiotic theocracy, we will be some sort of target for some nutjob.

whatever...........

i have give the better choice, you still choose the stupid one, go on......................

its not my problem people got killed cause of the thing that we can avoid it easily

happy to all westerner, bye..................

by Jonathan28 Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:14 am

Man, this thread is the gif that keeps on giving. So much irrationality. Keep on going guys, I'm loving this show. banana

by Winter is Coming Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:17 am

by rwo power Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:24 am

guest_07 wrote:its not my problem people got killed cause of the thing that we can avoid it easily

So you mean if I get offended by people praying because I consider belief in God insulting to human intelligence, it is in my right to go out with heavy weaponry and kill them? Well, it could easily be avoided by them stopping to believe and pray. Halleluja!

by guest_07 Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:49 am

rwo power wrote:
guest_07 wrote:its not my problem people got killed cause of the thing that we can avoid it easily
So you mean if I get offended by people praying because I consider belief in God insulting to human intelligence, it is in my right to go out with heavy weaponry and kill them? Well, it could easily be avoided by them stopping to believe and pray. Halleluja!

maybe you should learn the difference between DIRECTLY insult or INDIRECTLY insult

the example you give can be considered indirectly insult

by Jonathan28 Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:49 am

Goddamn, France, dafuq are you doing?!

I'm dying here. The hypocrisy is amazing rofl

The definition of Free Speech=Whatever we agree with it seems.

by guest_07 Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:55 am

Jonathan28 wrote:Goddamn, France, dafuq are you doing?!

I'm dying here. The hypocrisy is amazing

how can you differentiate between westerner & hypocrisy?

the difference is almost close to zero

by Peccadillo Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:15 am

VivaStPauli wrote:
BarrileteCosmico wrote:
VivaStPauli wrote:And don't give me that "minority" shit, a minority can't keep an entire gender disenfranchised.
Let's not pretend that every Muslim woman is disenfranchised... Catholic women still can't even become priests or have a position of real leadership within the church.

And I don't really expect revolution to start because of my words.

I just think it's worth pointing out that literally everywhere there's a thousand problems more pressing than "there's this tiny paper publishing cartoons", even though some people keep circling back to the argument that the "provocation" was the problem.

You know, it's the "she was dressed provocatively" of international relations. Infuriating.

I don't hear anyone saying provocation is the problem here though... It is undisputed that violent extremism (in this case violent Islamic extremism) is the problem..

Surely we need to observe some root causes to this wide spread radicalisation of Muslims though? Particularly when the crimes are committed by those born and/or nurtured to some degree in western societies.

Interesting debate btw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiWrhY6QYJU
I do by the way agree that in a sense Islamic institutions have failed its Muslims more than the West.

by RedOranje Thu Jan 15, 2015 8:01 am

guest_07 wrote:
how can you differentiate between westerner & hypocrisy?

the difference is almost close to zero

Paris: Charlie Hebdo shooting - Page 12 Kettle

by guest_07 Thu Jan 15, 2015 8:39 am

RedOranje wrote:
guest_07 wrote:
how can you differentiate between westerner & hypocrisy?

the difference is almost close to zero

westerner also have a sense of humour

by Sponsored content