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

Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 489 posts

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#121

Post by aNoob7000 »

[deleted] wrote: post #76
chroma wrote: post #32

The Charlie Hebdo attacks show that these days, real satire of Islam can't be done without significant risk of violent reprisal. If you doubt that statement, remember The Book of Mormon. (The play, not the actual book.) Could you imagine Trey Parker and Matt Stone making an equivalent Broadway play about Islam? Could you imagine them calling it The Qur'an to Google-bomb the original? Even if they disregarded their ow…

[deleted]

I'm sorry but I completely disagree with you. This is the kind of response that these extremists want.

There should be no topic off limits when it comes to satire and public commentary. The minute we start making exceptions then we start losing control of the conversation/discussion to those that want to control what can and cannot be said.

As a Catholic, I watched many cartoons lampooning our priests, pope, and Jesus. I can honestly say that sometimes I was offended and at other times, I had to laugh. But what I never did was go and kill those that offended my religion and my god.

We should hold accountable all individuals in any religious community that promote this type hatred and murderous attacks.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#122

Post by digi_owl »

nahiluhmot wrote: post #75

I'm nervous about the response that these attacks will conjure from the far right. There have already been a good deal of attempts on the lives of innocent Muslims [1] since the attack on Charlie Hebdo, and I find it very concerning that I have heard none of this from the national/international news media. Would these not as well be considered acts of terrorism? Why not report on them? Doing so would seem to unfairly…

Yeah, thats the really big one here. Frankly i see the shooters and the "far right" as pretty much two variants of the same. Swap around a few words on various slogans and you would not know if it came from jihadists or skinheads.

In almost all cases we are seeing young men with no apparent future being scooped up by some "recruiter" and indoctrinated. Street gangs, cults, terrorists, all the same once you boil away whatever "makeup" they apply...

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#124

Post by jules »

Udik wrote: post #71

Yesterday the Guardian published the best opinion I've read so far about satire, Charlie Hebdo, the terrorist attacks and our reaction to them. And it's a short comic strip by the cartoonist Joe Sacco: http://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2015/jan/09/...

I don't see what's so good about this. It's merely an uninsightful and flawed analogy with a deeply wrong conclusion. He completely misjudges Charlie Hebdo and the cultural context.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#125

Post by fit2rule »

neals wrote: post #7

I used to think society would, at some point, grow up and leave religion behind. But lately, it just feels like a far 'lower' form of religion is just taking over. I think that western christianity has made some big strides. For example, by leaving all the violence behind. Now the violent ones are winning. This makes me sad for the future of Europe.

Don't think for a moment that Western Christianity has 'left the violence behind' - its just being exported over the horizon to the Middle East, as modern crusades, beyond the view of the modern consumer. The difference between Christian terrorism and Islamic terrorism is that in the former, mass organizations exist to hide the results of Christian-fundamentalist violence, whereas in the latter the only chance they have is to expose their violence to the world.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#126

Post by trhway »

rikacomet wrote: post #95

First of all.. certainly as a Muslim, I condemn the attack on Charlie Hebdo. This is not Islam. But, if I were to take the liberty to express my own opinion, I would say honestly, I think both parties were at wrong here. First that their have been many instances in the life of our prophet, when he faced not just harsh but inhuman treatment, specially in his hometown of Mecca. Yet he never lifted a finger or even wish…

>First that their have been many instances in the life of our prophet, when he faced not just harsh but inhuman treatment, specially in his hometown of Mecca. Yet he never lifted an finger or even wished for those people to get hurt. It is against the moral of our religion to engage in such "eye for an eye" notions.

that just a blatant lie. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Badr among the others fights against Meccans that the paedophilic Muhammad led the Muslims into.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#127

Post by anoonmoose »

rikacomet wrote: post #95

First of all.. certainly as a Muslim, I condemn the attack on Charlie Hebdo. This is not Islam. But, if I were to take the liberty to express my own opinion, I would say honestly, I think both parties were at wrong here. First that their have been many instances in the life of our prophet, when he faced not just harsh but inhuman treatment, specially in his hometown of Mecca. Yet he never lifted a finger or even wish…

"both parties were at wrong here"..."it is a kin to playing with their feelings"..."such mishaps happen"..."the level of satire in question here, was perhaps too much".

Honestly, I can't help but come away feeling that what you're saying is that what Hebdo did was so wrong on their part that they should have seen it coming and it is their own fault.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#128

Post by xcode_ »

xcode_ wrote: post #115
jpgvm wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Surely those faggots need to be condemned/punished/killed/whatever This is exactly what is wrong with people that hold your point of view. You privledge religion as something sacred and then go on to be homophobic and encourage the use of violence as a form of punishment. This is a common theme from people the defend religion and it's pedestal. If you want to claim that views are views you need to put everything on…

I think no religion preaches violence, including Islam. Its the followers that have their own interpretations.. Do we relate the acts of Hitler to Christianity?

if HN as a community cannot accept a simple, logical and apparently non-offending statement against christianity. Then it really needs to declare it as a policy, and endorse Islamic bashing officially!

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#129

Post by Shivetya »

replax wrote: post #118
chroma wrote: post #32

The Charlie Hebdo attacks show that these days, real satire of Islam can't be done without significant risk of violent reprisal. If you doubt that statement, remember The Book of Mormon. (The play, not the actual book.) Could you imagine Trey Parker and Matt Stone making an equivalent Broadway play about Islam? Could you imagine them calling it The Qur'an to Google-bomb the original? Even if they disregarded their ow…

While what you said is probably true for obvious reasons, also remember that those cartoons probably offended around 1.5bn people. Seeing that three people decided to react violently after several years of the paper being put out weekly, it is fairly safe to say that this could be described as a clash of the extreme extremists (of whom there are very few). I am pretty sure the outrage against anti-Semitic jokes would…

could have offended, if they even saw them. The issue is, how much offense was their really. If Islam is like any other religion there is a significant number who just don't care. They don't want to be bothered.

What we have here is a bunch of extremist trying to incite violence against their faith in order to create more recruits by demonstrating oppression. It does not matter that their actions caused it, it only matters it exists.

Used to be you could isolate a country to make them come around, restrict access to trade and banking. With these groups your going to have to make sure they have no home. keep them on the move so much they cannot get established. It won't be easy or quick, but the alternative is allowing them a beachhead and being subject to their whims

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#130

Post by obituary_latte »

philh wrote: post #77
tomp wrote: post #4

> Warning: this article contains the image of the magazine cover, which some may find offensive. It's the first time I've seen something like this on Guardian; I don't even remember it on articles discussing rape, murder or such, which is usually where "trigger warning" applies. Personally, I find such trigger warnings, and especially "you might be offended" warnings, totally ridiculous. What about me? I find such wa…

> I find such warnings an insult to my intelligence and a trivialization of people's personal responsibility How so? If an article says "trigger warning: (rape/Mohammed/spiders/flashing lights)", then people who don't want to be exposed to those things (e.g. due to PTSD, religion, phobias, epilepsy - or simply because it upsets them and they don't particularly want to be upset right now) can choose not to read it. Ho…

I think the disparity here is that the "trigger warning" is warning that there's a possibility someone's feelings might be hurt which is ridiculous. If we start down that path, where do we draw the line?

Please edit your post to include a trigger warning: comparing epilepsy and religious belief may insult some people. See? Absurd.

Post reply on HN