Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Je Suis Charlie

charliehebdo.fr

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 292 posts

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#211

Post by sehr »

_almosnow wrote: post #209

I honestly want to know how is it allowed for someone to humiliate and make fun of something that is sacred to other people/culture. 'Free speech' I know, but when does someone's right to express themselves ends? Doesn't (or shouldn't) it has its limits? There are many other instances where you can't get away with something just because it is free speech. How come guys like Julian Assange are not protected under 'fre…

(No snark intended), just google it. For example the Wikipedia page for free speech in the US is pretty detailed, and covers a lot of the legislation regarding it.

Lots of people have asked and answered this type of question over the years, and most of it's been documented!

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#212

Post by waps »

sehr wrote: post #211
_almosnow wrote: post #209

I honestly want to know how is it allowed for someone to humiliate and make fun of something that is sacred to other people/culture. 'Free speech' I know, but when does someone's right to express themselves ends? Doesn't (or shouldn't) it has its limits? There are many other instances where you can't get away with something just because it is free speech. How come guys like Julian Assange are not protected under 'fre…

(No snark intended), just google it. For example the Wikipedia page for free speech in the US is pretty detailed, and covers a lot of the legislation regarding it. Lots of people have asked and answered this type of question over the years, and most of it's been documented!

I think maybe he meant from the perspective of muslims. That answer is here :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Asma%27_bint_Marwan

This is what makes this so difficult : muslims killing because of negative opinions on islam is something that is sanctioned by the religion, and that was practiced for over 15 centuries now.

A very uncomfortable question is what muslim children in the west are taught on this question.

I'm sure this will get downvoted, but it's simply the truth.

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#213

Post by IkmoIkmo »

mercer wrote: post #129
gohrt wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know what most Muslims think about Charlie Hebdo Maybe ask most Muslims, not some self-appointed leaders?

At least here in Holland, many muslims form communities, often centered around cultural and religious centers. These communities tend to have leaders and/or spokespeople. These people can speak on behalf of the community. They are not (necessarily) self-appointed. In my experience, here, the moderate muslims are often rather quiet, perhaps out of fear. In general, they do not support extremism and fear non-muslim ext…

> In my experience, here, the moderate muslims are often rather quiet, perhaps out of fear. In general, they do not support extremism and fear non-muslim extremist retaliation. They are in a really bad spot, and I sympathize with their situation.

They're no more quiet than when say a white Christian lunatic (Breivik) shot 77 people to death and injured over 300. The vast majority of them will denounce both acts, but otherwise they're pretty quiet. Which goes for most people, really, none of my non-muslim friends have gone to any demonstrations lately or spoke out publicly. Sure there are people who do it, but that goes for muslims, too. It's not always very well reported, but if you go and look you'll find a shit ton of muslim leaders denounce such attacks, for example today the French Muslim Council called it an "attack on democracy", barbaric, an attack on freedom of the press etc. And you don't really see anyone speak out against those Muslim organisations like CFCM which is said to represent between 3.5 and 5 million muslims in France. And these aren't just formal organisations, they often have deep ties to the community, particularly with direct links to formal networks of all mosques in the country.

I always wonder what it'd really look like. I'm not religious but family is. They look at attacks like these with disgust. But he's not a well known individual, he has no place on TV to 'publicly speak out'. What would that even look like? Public persons tend to speak out against attacks like these without exception. Today the Muslim Mayor of Rotterdam did, and a Muslim member of the Labor party has planned demonstrations with a large Moroccan youth movement coinciding with demonstrations planned in France.

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#214

Post by _almosnow »

schoen wrote: post #210
_almosnow wrote: post #209

I honestly want to know how is it allowed for someone to humiliate and make fun of something that is sacred to other people/culture. 'Free speech' I know, but when does someone's right to express themselves ends? Doesn't (or shouldn't) it has its limits? There are many other instances where you can't get away with something just because it is free speech. How come guys like Julian Assange are not protected under 'fre…

There's absolutely nothing illegal in the U.S. about insulting or disparaging black people, or members of any racial, ethnic, or religious group, including by slurs or caricatures.

Apparently there is... [1]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_excep...

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#215

Post by krig »

skrebbel wrote: post #125
krig wrote: post #22

This is horrible, and we as a society need to somehow make this kind of thing not happen. I have no idea what that means in practice, though. It seems everything that has been tried so far has only escalated the hatred and strengthened the extremists. Also, at a time like this it is important not to forget that the last major terrorist attack in Europe was instigated by a fundamentalist christian norwegian. https://e…

> This is horrible, and we as a society need to somehow make this kind of thing not happen. No. We shouldn't. We as a society need to stand for values of openness, freedom of speech and freedom of religion. There is no way to do this other than to accept that there are psychopaths and lunatics among the human race and sometimes they do something terrible. After all, the only way to truly prevent acts like these is wi…

Right, maybe I was not clear enough in my meaning - I have some hope that there are ways to make this not happen at all or at least happen a lot more rarely, and I think the way to get there is to get the standard of living and education, and the openness of society, extended to all people, and for religion and fundamentalist thought to be a rare fringe activity and not commonplace.

I don't think an absolute police state can prevent violent acts, because an absolute police state IS violence.

It's easy to forget that less than 100 years ago the whole world was at war. There has been progress, even though things may seem bleak. We are still at the infancy of global civilization. Of course it's possible that we're also at the zenith of global civilization, but that's where the hope comes in...

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#216

Post by leepowers »

_almosnow wrote: post #209

I honestly want to know how is it allowed for someone to humiliate and make fun of something that is sacred to other people/culture. 'Free speech' I know, but when does someone's right to express themselves ends? Doesn't (or shouldn't) it has its limits? There are many other instances where you can't get away with something just because it is free speech. How come guys like Julian Assange are not protected under 'fre…

The legal line, I think, is once a speaker goes beyond insults and causes demonstrable harm to another person. So defamation crosses the line. Causing a person to feel offended does not.

It could be argued that going out of your way to caricature a religious group is unethical. But it is legal (that is, should be allowed in a free society).

In either case responding with violence to a personal insult barbaric and unjustifiable. One can always read different magazines, watch different videos, etc.

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#217

Post by waps »

Jayd2014 wrote: post #200
mercer wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least here in Holland, many muslims form communities, often centered around cultural and religious centers. These communities tend to have leaders and/or spokespeople. These people can speak on behalf of the community. They are not (necessarily) self-appointed. In my experience, here, the moderate muslims are often rather quiet, perhaps out of fear. In general, they do not support extremism and fear non-muslim ext…

A Muslim here. > the moderate muslims are often rather quiet. Yes we are. But there are a few reasons for that: 1- First, Muslims can't be put in one group, there is 1.6 billion muslims worldwide with hundreds of different views and levels of tolerance. 2- Most of them don't have time or are too busy with their daily life. Think about the % of people who go vote every four years in a democracy. 30% maybe 50% at max v…

The problem is that the terrorists are right about islam.

So what do you think about your prophet doing the same ? Are you also ashamed of that ? He had the mother of 5 children murdered for opposing him. As you (should) know, this is far from the only instance of such action by "the prophet".

I am sorry but unless you wholeheartedly condemn this kind of killing, whoever did it, your gesture means little. If you don't condemn your prophet, when is killing for insults allowed and when is it not becomes a valid question.

To put it bluntly : if you don't condemn this, you're at least somewhat of a terrorist supporter. If you do, how can you be a muslim (given what the daily prayer says, mohamed could not have done anything wrong, plus you'd be lying when you say that prayer).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Asma%27_bint_Marwan

Allow me to put up the full actions of the prophet :

  Upon hearing the poem, Muhammad then called for her death
  in turn, saying "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?"
  Umayr bin Adiy al-Khatmi, a blind man belonging to the
  same tribe as Asma’s husband (i.e., Banu Khatma)
  responded that he would. He crept into her room in the
  dark of night where she was sleeping with her five
  children, her infant child close to her bosom. Umayr
  removed the child from Asma's breast and killed her.
This is far from the only time that muhammad did this sort of thing, and this is part of the "canon" of islam. It is also law in over 50 countries.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Asma%27_bint_Marwan

(but if you doubt the quote, just type it into Google)

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#218

Post by krig »

RivieraKid wrote: post #175
krig wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? He himself claims that it does, in the sense that he sees himself as a Christian crusader defending the european christian monoculture against an islamic invasion. His reason for killing social democrats was that he feels that the party is too supportive of a multicultural society.

That was xenophobia, naionalism, traditionalism, etc.

Those are all aspects of his acts, and the acts of the Islamic State as well. You can't separate religion cleanly from traditionalism for example, because religion is to a large part tradition - it is not a coincidence that sons commonly have the religion of their fathers. The acts of Breivik definitely have a religious component. He dresses like a Knight Templar, he speaks of a crusade, these are all religious in nature.

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#219

Post by _almosnow »

sehr wrote: post #211
_almosnow wrote: post #209

I honestly want to know how is it allowed for someone to humiliate and make fun of something that is sacred to other people/culture. 'Free speech' I know, but when does someone's right to express themselves ends? Doesn't (or shouldn't) it has its limits? There are many other instances where you can't get away with something just because it is free speech. How come guys like Julian Assange are not protected under 'fre…

(No snark intended), just google it. For example the Wikipedia page for free speech in the US is pretty detailed, and covers a lot of the legislation regarding it. Lots of people have asked and answered this type of question over the years, and most of it's been documented!

I see, when it comes down to the jurisdiction of the US the exceptions are clear enough. I see that Charlie Hebdo would have been in a lot of legal trouble if they were based on the US then. I don't know why I've tought that the law would be very similar in most of the world but it isn't, or apparently in France they were allowed to stay in business (although for what I've been reading they had been fined a few times regarding issues that violate the scope of freedom of speech).

Re: Je Suis Charlie

#220

Post by Jayd2014 »

waps wrote: post #217
Jayd2014 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Muslim here. > the moderate muslims are often rather quiet. Yes we are. But there are a few reasons for that: 1- First, Muslims can't be put in one group, there is 1.6 billion muslims worldwide with hundreds of different views and levels of tolerance. 2- Most of them don't have time or are too busy with their daily life. Think about the % of people who go vote every four years in a democracy. 30% maybe 50% at max v…

The problem is that the terrorists are right about islam. So what do you think about your prophet doing the same ? Are you also ashamed of that ? He had the mother of 5 children murdered for opposing him. As you (should) know, this is far from the only instance of such action by "the prophet". I am sorry but unless you wholeheartedly condemn this kind of killing, whoever did it, your gesture means little. If you don'…

Well since you are asking about typing it in google. I actually did. Here is what comes as an answer from the muslim side[1]:

A member on my blog, brother "zulfiqarchucknorris", sent me the following information:

Peace Dear Osama Abdullah I would like to inform you that on the many articles about the "poet killings" (specifically asma bint marwan) you fail to to include why the asma bint marwan chain for ibn saad is weak, although the ibn ishaq version is fully explained. I'll give you the explanasion:

(copied from wikipedia, scroll toward the middle of the page)

Al-Albani declared Ibn Sa'd's chain of transmission to be weak as well, as it includes Al-Waqidi:[2]

Ibn Sa'd → Al-Waqidi → 'Abd Allah ibn al-Harith ibn al-Fudayl → Al-Harith ibn al-Fudayl

Al-Waqidi has been condemned as an untrustworthy narrator and has been frequently and severely criticized by scholars, thus his narrations have been abandoned by the majority of hadith scholars.[3] Yahya ibn Ma'een said: "Al-Waqidi narrated 20,000 false hadith about the prophet". Al-Shafi'i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Al-Albani[2] said: "Al-Waqidi is a liar" while Al-Bukhari said he didn't include a single letter by Al-Waqidi in his hadith works.

In addition, this isnad is discontinued (muʻḍal) as Al-Harith ibn al-Fudayl never met any of Muhammad's companions.[3]

2 is al waqidi 3 is ibn hisham

[1]http://www.answering-christianity.com/karim/forgeries_about_...

Copy pasting doesn't help anyone. I'd rather have it that you go to someone who is an expert on this field, do your research and ask him/her what's bugging you.

Post reply on HN