This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
French Magazine Portrays Prophet Mohammad Naked In Cartoons, Set To Further Infuriate Muslim World
It's almost as if someone is actively trying to force the Muslim world to launch an all out war against the "developed" west. A week ago, it was a film mocking Mohammad which led to the death of the US ambassador in Libya. Today, it is a French magazine which has ridiculed the Prophet Mohammad by portraying him naked in cartoons, which, as Reuters logically adds, "threatens to fuel the anger of Muslims around the world who are already incensed by a film depiction of him as a womanizing buffoon." It is as if the anti-Iran strategy of antagonizing the country to its breaking point, merely so the first attack comes from them in response to endless provocations, and a defensive retaliation can be spun to the "free world", has now been adopted against the entire Muslim world now, and all the insolvent Western countries are praying they get attacked just so the media spin will coalesce the sheep around the "developed" democracies in an all out "retaliatory" assault, which among other things, liberates tens of millions of barrel of oil equivalents, even as it spreads democracy and unlimited credit cards.
Naturally, just as in the case of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula video, where the US government promptly washed its hands but not before condemning the response, so here too, the French administration has promptly bashed the cartoon. Of course, it is just this "freedom" that the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo had, that the Muslim world supposedly "hates us for." Needless to say, the damage has already been done and the second major provocation against the Muslim world by the west, with a mass response that will be no surprise to anyone, has been launched. One of these days the desired reaction to the endless battery of provocations will finally take place.
From Reuters:
The French government, which had urged the magazine not to print the images, said it was temporarily shutting down premises including embassies and schools in 20 countries on Friday, when protests sometimes break out after Muslim prayers.
Riot police were deployed to protect the Paris offices of satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo after it hit the news stands with a cover showing an Orthodox Jew pushing the turbaned figure of Mohammad in a wheelchair.
On the inside pages, several caricatures of the Prophet showed him naked. One, entitled "Mohammad: a star is born", depicted a bearded figure crouching over to display his buttocks and genitals.
Initial reaction from Muslim countries was critical.
"Of course it will anger people further. It will raise tensions that were already dangerously high," said Sheikh Nabil Rahim, a leading Salafist cleric in Lebanon.
"We will try to keep things managed and peaceful, but these things easily get out of hand. I fear there could more targeting of foreigners, and this is why I wish they would not persist with these provocations."
In Egypt, Essam Erian, acting head of the powerful Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, told Reuters: "We reject and condemn the French cartoons that dishonor the Prophet and we condemn any action that defames the sacred according to people's beliefs."
...
Charlie Hebdo has a long reputation for being provocative. Its Paris offices were firebombed last November after it published a mocking caricature of Mohammad, and Charbonnier has been under police guard ever since.
Speaking outside his offices in an eastern neighborhood with many residents of North African origin, Charbonnier said he had not received any threats over the latest cartoons. In a message on its Twitter account, Charlie Hebdo said its website had been hacked, but referred readers to a blog it also uses.
The French Muslim Council, the main body representing Muslims in France, accused Charlie Hebdo of firing up anti-Muslim sentiment at a sensitive time.
"The CFCM is profoundly worried by this irresponsible act, which in such a fraught climate risks further exacerbating tensions and sparking damaging reactions," it said.
Well, as long as their hatred of our freedoms continues, all shall be well.
- 40562 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -



That's a fine justification for murder. Do you think Christ will buy it?
34Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
41Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Not selling, nor justifying anything....you seem to be anzious to picka fight with basic facts...that's all I've provided in response to your apparent efforts justify violence and squelch Constitutional rights....simply pointing out the double standard.
Asking folks to behave responsibly is not unconstitutional. What makes you believe that it is?
Ask away....it's your right...but that's really not your original position now, is it? You were decrying the rights of others to exercise their own voice as they see fit, and justifying it via the violent responses of others...in case you forgot.
I never said anything like that. You imagined it.
I imagine that this started with me telling some 'tard that getting all upset because someone ridiculed someone else was stupid. I guess I should have just said, "Lighten up, Francis" or "Buck up Buttercup" or "Sticks and stones..." but those didn't seem very funny really, and since the original post was SO stupid, the reply required some humor. I then further imagine that your response was
Which has really nothing to do with my comment nor the comment to which I was replying, so some folks (myself included) may missed your point. I finally imagine that this led all of us down a rabbit hole where you just kept quoting Mark Twain while slowly changing your tack as each of your posts got you further from logic.
But I probably just imagined that while I was temporarily touring King Arthur's Court after a blow to the head...
You said: "What? Shut up. When is it NOT right to ridicule someone? Maybe when their mom dies is the only possible time..." I then pointed out that many Muslims have seen their mothers not only die, but die by US aggression. It was a direct response to your comment.
You can pretend like you don't understand what's being said but it doesn't change the fact that you were wrong. Instead of "imagining" how this started why don't you quote me if I actually said the things which you attributed to me? Because you can't, that's why.
This little girl saw her mother and father gunned downed by US troops. Why don't you draw some balls on her and call it a day.
http://cdn4.spiegel.de/images/image-118443-galleryV9-mlfq.jpg
Dude (or dudette). I did quote you. Stop googling Mark Twain quotes and pay attention.
And your argument has just become stupid and gay. WTF does US aggression against some girl's mom and pop have to do with a french cartoonist's right to draw balls on a Mohammed?
Hey "lighten up tard".
There is a difference between good and evil. I am sure that someone even as backward as yourself can figure that out. In my book, fomenting wars by intentionally goading someone with statements INTENDED to enflame is evil. Supporting it is also evil. You choose evil. You have the right to choose ... but don't think that people will think it is right, just because you try to bully them.
If it is even 1, it is too many. But that's not the point. I would still ridicule them except maybe (and I am still waiting for the group's concensous on this) on the day or week of their mother's death.
And what about the US soldiers who are endangered because you delight in ridicule? Should they really be asked to put their lives on the line because you like to engage in bathroom humor? What will the war memorials say -- "These brave men died so that we could draw balls on Mohammed?"
Is that really what Samuel Clemens would say?
I guess it's possible; then again back in his day the men were conscripted if they didn't volunteer their bravery to die for the US' Manifest Monroe Destiny Doctrine of the day..
"Statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain
All kidding aside, yes. Because freedom and individual liberty are black and white. You have them or you don't. Soldiers understand this. I was going to explain this, but what's the point? You already seem to believe that people being allowed to say or think something should be limited by what may or may not offend someone else. Whatever...to discuss abolishionism in the early 1800's offended plenty of plantation owners....
I am in favor of individuals using courtesy and good judgement when interacting with others. Do you think that I would have a better chance of convincing you of that if we discussed it calmly or if I just started screaming, "YOUR MOTHER IS A WHORE!" Perhaps you never learned that just because you can engage in a particular activity doesn't mean that you should engage in that activity. It's not something that should be imposed on you by force but by your own upbringing and values.
If you're in favor of "courtesy and good judgement", then you must really dislike this country.
"What is courtesy? Consideration for others. Is there a good deal of it in the American character? So far as I have observed, no. Is it an American characteristic? So far as I have observed, the most prominent, the most American of all American characteristics, is the poverty of it in the American character." -- Mark Twain
So Maplethorpe was trying to start war with "Piss Christ"? Obama was declaring war on Middle America with his "bitter...clingers.." comment?...er, wait a minute...bad example....
Frankly, killing the jews in the 30s/40s was not ok, but they called for it, right ? If they hadn't antagonize guys with new science, great music, and novel litterature, that wouldn't have happended, so they're a bit faulty too, right ?
So yes, it is right to antagonize someone and their values when that someone wants to impose these values on you. That's a fight that's worth for all those on which these values are imposed, be them muslim women, modern muslim guys who don't want to live in a society regulated by a 7th century book.
love it. that's my strategy. flood the zone with naked muhamad pix and wathc the caliphate burn themselves silly. better than throwing bacon at 'em.
They did it for the lulz.
Of course, the problem isn't really the images, or the videos, it's the high food prices and decades of repression at the hands of the West. Most people don't like to look past the surface though, and as such, they really just take things at face value, like pretending that Muslims are somehow not human beings (dehumanization as a prelude to war) or are all crazy, because that is the only time they really hear about them in the news (correspondance bias: http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Correspondence_bias read both blog posts).
We humans really are flawed creatures. We must learn what our flaws are in order to overcome them. Most people aren't interested in that, though.
Good post. Level headed. Deep evolution is required of all of us.
No, it's a load of crap.
If the Islamic peoples of MENA want what the West has they need to evolve (perhaps even deeply) their culture and institutions accordingly.
You, sister, wouldn't amount to much over there for reasons that have nothing to do with Western repression, real or imagined.
So you are saying that the Islamic peoples of MENA are evil mutants?
Did you read the blog posts?
Edit: Also, people do funny things when they are hungry, like lashing out at oppressors, real or imagined: http://www.technologyreview.com/view/425019/the-cause-of-riots-and-the-p...
Uh, no. "Evil mutant" and legitimate grievance actually aren't the only two possibilities here and in any case they're venting their spleen in the direction of least resistance which is our government, not theirs. If anyone's argument is suffering from correspondence bias here it's yours.
Fiat money printing has recently spiked world food prices but the very long term trend (for say, inflation adjusted wheat prices) has very much been DOWN thanks to technology and innovations developed in places very much unlike Saudi Arabia.
Every religion has their fanatics. Do you really think ALL Muslims want the violence? Overgeneralization is dangerous and narrow minded.
They should not want everything we have, some of what we have is toxic.
Knee jerkers are every where. No one is innocent.
As I see it, the great misfortune is that my side WILL start something that I do not want, and then I will have to fight anyway, regardless, not based on ideology, but as pure self defense because some financiers see a way to turn a buck. To not acknowledge our part in this is pure hypocracy.
No one should be provoked into killing because of a picture or movie. There is more to it than that, we meddle in their destiny constantly so that we can get our hands on their resources. If you know that the audience is at that level of evolution (reactive, kneejerk), does it make sense to put it out there? Seems to me to be equally unevolved to make that choice. But freedom is like that, freedom to make mistakes and learn the hard way.
Everyone keeps looking for formulas and answers. This thing is a moving target, a lot of grey territory. I am not willing to condemn a whole race, religion, etc.
The bottom line here is that if the culture and institutions in question here were more pluralistic, subject to republican governance and held sacrosanct specific, individual civil rights against the state, they and their peoples would be in a much better position to resist the meddling of powerful outsiders and foreigners. Societies that have these things also tend to be more prosperous than those that don’t, even if they’re blessed with valuable natural resources.
>No one should be provoked into killing because of a picture or movie.<
Unclear whether you think that the greater onus is on the free-speaker or the person(s) doing the killing - and it shouldn't be since this distinction very neatly summarizes the problem here.
The free speaker knew about the killers and made a choice to engage in speech that would provoke more violence. The free speakers have the same advantages you describe that you and I have. The killers do not. We actually have more of the "onus" on us, because damn-it, we know better. The killers are isolated and have an extreme socialization that they must get past-- hard to do.
We don't yell fire in a movie theater for LOLz and say it is okay. If I go into a Zoo and tease the Tiger and it bites me, we all look at me and call me a jerk and say I am lucky to be alive.
They have the right to draw and write what they wish, I have the right to disagree with their choice and call them childish attention seekers (or deliberate politically motivated shit disturbers) for making the choice.
The violence is wrong. It may be the case we need to wipe them off the face of the earth because they refuse to get along with anyone outside their belief system. But even as I type that, trying to get my head around the position of someone who is resigned to this point of view, as I think, and project forward, it ends badly. Innocents are killed and persecuted. The folks hired to wipe them off the earth are hurt and killed and leave families on their own to fend for themselves. I know I have taken an extreme position that is not one you have articulated here, but this is where your train of thought leads. If there is another place that this goes that I have not thought of, help me out.
Sir or Madam,
I typically enjoy your posts as they are thoughtful and usually a bit witty. This one is way off the reservation, though.
1 - You correctly state that one does not yell fire in a crowded theatre for LULZ. There is no parallel to this issue; it is completly irrelevant. The reason one IS NOT ALLOWED to yell fire in a crowded theatre is because it presents a safety hazard to all the patrons of the theatre who (who are trying to protect themselves). In this case, no one is harmed, or if you are really a sensitive soul, you still have to at least admit that no one is made to feel as if phyiscal harm will come to them because some idiot dared to put an image to Mohammed.
2 - The next example is more relevant...it is technically the exact same thing. But it doesn't back up your argument. If I (cartoonist) piss off a tiger (muslims) and the tiger kicks my ass (brutally decapitates me on Al Jazeera), well then they are murderers and I, knowing this is their nature, am an idiot. But so what? Should I not have pissed them off? Let sleeping tigers lie, as it were? Would the lunacy of physical harm over a thought or a cartoon go away then? My thinks not.
3 - The violence is wrong. Correct. That's all that is needed. The rest goes off in the wrong direcation. All the violence is wrong. Both sides. What are we supposed to do when the threats are made, when the embassies are attacked, etc.? Ignore them. Leave their land, offer them no assistance, tell them to rot and die on their hatred (and apologize for the mercantilistic mistakes of our past leaders).
<dupe print>
1. There are a few but important common law and other perfectly legitimate legal restrictions to free speech but causing offense isn’t (or shouldn’t be) one of them. When it is, that’s a bad sign. No one has falsely panicked innocents here or cried wolf here.
2. MENA Muslims aren’t animals so the tiger teasing analogy doesn’t hold any water at all.
3. It is certainly not the case that all violence is wrong but if you’re going to make war it’s best to do so in a very serious and unequivocal manner…or not at all. It should be obvious by now that there is in fact no substitute for victory and that half-measures, “proportionate responses”, understanding-seeking and groveling accomplishes less than nothing or even earn respect from the other side.
I like your first post, the second one was no good though. ;)
1. Obviously agree
2. You are being a tad literal, no?
3. Fair enough. If I used the term aggression instead of violence could we be closer to agreement?
2. No because in this context that amounts to: “We are going to treat you with more deference than other peoples because frankly, we have lower expectations for you.” I’m pretty sure that would piss them off too. Actually, and with apologies to Ms. C., in practice this is the sanest and most rational approach (and at this point my expectations are lower). But one can’t have it both ways; set the bar lower for civil behavior and human potential for certain cultures and at the same time maintain that all cultures have positive virtues in equal amounts and that cultural “diversity” is, in and of itself, always beneficial. I’m not saying this is your view but it is our dominant, default posture these days…that is when it isn’t: Treat other cultures with special reverence and respect because yours is soaked in original sin.
3. You mean like: it is wrong to respond to the exercise of free speech, however distasteful or offensive, with physical aggression?
Remember these ah..."film makers" weren't even in "Rome" and were under no obligation to behave like Romans.
Good point! You are right. I am lumping them into a basket of people for which I have lowered expectations for civility, human potential, peace, and love. But you think I am doing in culturally. I am not. I am doing it religiously...and I paint with a broad brush. I put them all in that same basket as a rule and deal with the exceptions when they arise.
Regarding #3, I made my amendment to account for the idea that it is ok, maybe, sometimes, to respond to aggression with violence. One must accept certain aspects of human nature and so it is just silly to pretend that you can just mind your own business and you will be left alone. I still have no issue with the "film makers" or the "cartoonists" doing what they did (expressing an (idiodic) opinion). I think it is silly but I chose not to care. I take issue to the responses to these "words". Violence in response to "words" cannot be tolerated.
You make good points and I own that as I wrote what I wrote, it seemed condecending to say the onus was on us because they lacked a broader education and socialization. That is indeed a way to position myself and my culture as superior.
I don't know what else to do. I certainly would not cave if personally attacked but I cannot condemn them all when there are so many interpretations and varieties of the religion. In Christianity, some follow the old testament, some the new. The old testament folks, at the extremes, look exceedingly kooky. I will not damn all Christians with that.
I will stand by it that the individual act of publishing the pictures, given the recent history, was inflammatory and self serving. If you know there are folks like this out there that will react with violence, you are poking a tiger just to get it to react that way again. The deaths that ensue (if they do) are certainly something that you should feel some responsibility for.
I think we agree more than I am comfortable with. Absolutes will not work for me however. I don't think they would really work for you either. Thanks for the civilized discussion.
Tmosley,
Sorry mate, as much as I agree with you on nearlly every issue (junk away). You are 100% wrong on the muslims. I live in England and we have a large and growing population up here in the northern area who will not, and I mean not intergrate or tolerate the local populace. The PC laws here make it imposible for us to criticise the fact our area is changing out of all recognition from England to Bangladesh. You say anything at all about their behaviour, especially an unhealthy interest in young white girls and you are a racist and arrested. Just google liverpool peodophile ring and see what is covered up here.
I am a firm believer of live and let live, but please, you lot are following us down the road to destruction, England is being outbreeded by the muslims 9-1, only takes one generation with our entitlements mate and we ard we are done.
Think about this, we do it, then you do it? This CANNOT end well.
I leave one note, 15 years ago, a woman walking about looking like a pillarbox would have caused outrage, bringing practices they have came to escape to my country now makes this allright, and TOLLERABLE? We have come a long way in such a short space of time. And none of for the better. This is not islamibad, this is England.
:(
Somewhere, the Central Planners are smiling as they watch these events unfold. It is way past time for the common people to realize when their chain is being jerked.
So the NATO want to stir up hatred world wide and to distract people from going after criminal bankers. Brainwashed sheep
Is that what mojamid looked like? Who would have thunk
It's almost as if someone is actively trying to force the Muslim world to launch an all out war against the "developed" west...
Or just force this ridiculous issue one way or the other. The situation we have now is bullshit.
The real point here folks is that this kind of thing -words and images- shouldn't constitute a "major provocation" (ZH's words) or be treated as such and it is completely separate from the issue from government insolvency regardless of whether or not attempts are made to leverage/conflate/manipulate them together.
Like this is the first time inflammatory things have been printed about Islam. Yet none have created a reaction as violent as these thus far.
Geez... I wonder why they are so pissed off now. Insult to injury perhaps??? Nah...
Because they've learned through experience that protest/outrage/violence over such things ends up being beneficial to their interests and has recently only become more so.
Duh.
Any such expressions over THIS particular bit of mockery, which has nothing to do with Islam will get you bupkis because we have decided that there should be diferent rules for different people...something that the anti-bankster/OWS/99%/social justice crowd is supposed to be in a dither about.
These misguided souls. They don't realize how easily this can be weaponized.
Must be the amount of drone strikes will be increased along with oil and food prices?
Of course, the not- even- porno- quality youtube trailer and a french ripoff of the Simpsons cartoon will be the casus belli.
pods
naked mohammad:
here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/9x7a5gm
Nice. I'd riot over that! /sarc
at least the cartoonist was decent and considerate enough to cover mohammad's ass hole with a nice bright star. i find that commendable and the cartoonist should get extra bonus points for being sensible. who wants to see a hairy ass hole? even if it's the prophet's hairy ass hole. not me... bad enough his hairy nutsack is on display. that must be condemned!
Ah the Freedom and Justice party has spoken, Orwell would be proud. Oh, are they allowed to read Orwell?
Must have run out of topless Kate pics.
They made a big enough mountain out of those molehills.
The French don't seem to realize that surrounding their very cosmopolitan, Napoleonic je-ne-sais-quoi tufa-block cities brimming with artsy, aristocratic, agnostic waifs are very uncosmopolitan, spartan, allah-hu-akbar concrete towers brimming with hungry, male, unemployed, muslim waifs.
wrong; they are french first, sons of the republic and INCIDENTALLY of muslim origin. Don't mix your priorities.
Its that or else its not a republic.
That they be out of a job is no reason to become obscurantist.
right; and when 2005 happens again, maybe this time a very dapper gendarme has a caffeine tic and shoots up a brown kid tying his shoe, these incidentally muslim sons of the republic will this time accept their rightful lot as a servile underclass (i.e. slaves) and not burn the place down.
Sons of the Republic, hey, sing a chanson patriotique for us all. Maybe that will help.
don't confuse dapper oligarchy world, sub poverty level 99er world, religion and race.
Those riots could hit ANY country, developed or otherwise, if food prices increase by 15-20% and earnings fall by 30%, which seems like happening any time. If the Greece syndrome hits Eurozone or USA big time.
What has a hungry young man got to do with his origins and his religion?
He is a loser in this world, born wrong place, wrong time....period.
That's got nothing to do with religion or race. That's civilization chimes and it rhymes with tipping times.
I don't disagree about grain prices being the match, if you would let me add that religion is the kindling. France is on a spit, whether the French would admit it or not. The "suburban youth" can very easily be poetically described as an incidentally muslim orphan class.
Does the United States still have a problem with its once-upon-a-time-African slave underclass? You bet. That's a trade with the devil, made once.
A trade with the devil can become a trade with God if you followed the precepts written on the statue of Liberty; remember that Lady and her message?
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." These words from the "The New Colossus," written in 1883, appear on the Statue's pedestal.
"Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name,
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Will we ever learn how to live up to our legacy of frontiers already conquered that we give up like panick striken regressionists? Its the betrayal of this message I call civilization chimes....and BTW : there is no mention of race or religion on it!
1) wtf r u smokn kid
2) i can haz sun? k thnx bai
Don't kid yourself, the west needs these plebes to keep wages low.
Precisely my point. The French don't seem to realize this.
I LOVE IT!!!
BECAUSE THAT'S WHO WE ARE!! NOW RESPECT US FOR DOING WHAT WE WANT IN OUR OWN COUNTRY!!
AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, NO MORE FREE WELLFARE FOR YOU AND TAKE THE BOAT BACK ALI!!
Does your "freedom" span all religions? Try this and get back to us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial
I don't agree with the law because it turns the topic absurd.
But what kind of idiot denies this?
hahaha, freedom of speech as long as it suits you. niiiiice. :)
Hey Rabbi, whatcha doin?!?
this is absolutely ridiculous. Soon we will have Zero Dark Thirty being released which will stoke the embers even more.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1790885/
This is the sort of thread that demonstrates how low ZH posters can go.
the fact these kind of theads exist is because muslims a so quickly insulted because of their low selfesteem.
If you're offened that quickly, you've got issues. BIGTIME!
Those who get their jollies drawing the genitals of religious figures must have great self esteem. Does it make you feel like a big man when US troops come under attack as a result of your fun and games? If we want to bring our people home pulling this kind of childish stunt is not the way to do it.
I reject the point of view that we should allow fascists to control our freedom because of their intolerance. That is the same thinking that asked, "why do they hate us?" after 9/11, rather than asking, "how do we kill the bastards?" I'm in the latter camp.
You didn't explain how drawing balls on Mohammed helps your self esteem. Clue me in.
Maybe the answer is : dont colonise their lands, get those soldiers back from a dirty mission.
But never cede on civilization fundamentals; and don't link those two things and never allow others to link them either.
So it is civilized to draw balls on a religious figure in attempt to anger others and drive them toward violence? I just don't see the profit in it. What's the EROI?
I haven't seen the caricatures; but I do know that Jesus and Mary have been much caricatured in the press. If free speech is the yardstick of our civilization then we must hold it up; even if we condemn the content and the slant of that caricature.
My free will would be to say : the press has the right to do what it does. The muslims should not get hot under the collar by this press slant. If anything they should deride the specific media as being shallow. Being grown up on these issues is part of being responsible citizen.
Islamic believers show strength if they stay calm. What is inner beliefs cannot be deterred by other man's stupidity.
On a similar plane, Japan should stay calm in front of Chinese provocation. Thats being responsible.
A caricature does not engage anybody except the author. Get over seeing balls on a caricature as being balls on an iconic prophet. Don't fall for that mind association.
Keeping calm in the face of ridicule if all well and good. But there is a lack of calmness in the apparent need to insult others in the most hurtful way you can imagine. Were is the benefit? These cartoons have done absolutely nothing to secure my rights or make the world safer or more productive.
free will is not a perfect concept; as perfection is not of this world.
Stop flogging a ded horse, it won't resurrect. If you think there is a hidden agenda you may be right. But that is not the point.
In our current world there is a hidden agenda every time anybody says anything printable as people are looking for blowback or payout. We are not talking here of specifics but of generalities and social attitudes, where lie those rubicons.
It's odd that someone who thinks that drawing pee-pees and wee-wees is an act of courage would be concerned about perfection, worldly or otherwise.
We are not talking here of specifics but of generalities and social attitudes, where lie those rubicons.
Wherever you can make correlations with religion (or even culture or anything) and violence and uncivil behaviour, in those very same places you can make correlations between poverty and violence.
And when I say poverty, I am talking about abject poverty and a sharp contrast with silly monies, 2 extremes.
People in Mongolia, despite being poor could be happy as opposed to say people around LA, hence the rampant gun crime.
But dont let simple empathy and understanding spoil your high on arrogance or snob appeal.
A rich guy staying calm and pissing on a loaf of bread and steak and making mockery while a poor guy watches his kids dying of hunger... Both have their freedoms.
Lot of educated and intelligent people and lack wisdom.
Anybody who believes in free will as expression of western civilization will NEVER bow to intolerance and dogma from where ever it comes. Its the very essence of what Greek man taught us.
Those Salafists should read their own Muslim history; where the Mufti was ridiculed for being a repeater of dogmatic word without critical thinking. The essence of Islam is that the individual speaks to God without intermediary. And balsphemy is for none to judge accept God himself as he is all knowing; not even Mohammed, his messenger could pretend he was perfect as he was mortal. That is the true message of Islam; tolerance and peace. Mohammed was only inviolate as his prophet, not as man.
Anyways, we here are sons of the Socratic tradition where our nation states know no other individual truth accept what we say ourselves as responsible citizens. Its called free will.
Politics and religion are never on the same page. We've gotten over that; its time the muslim world does as well.
The last time Arabs were civilized was the 15th century, and they still act like it. Trillions of dollars of oil wealth and what did they do with it? Taught their children to "kill the infidel". A colossal waste of resources on stupidity.
Are you referring to the Saudi funding of Wahhabi Islam? Tell me, who is it that props up that royal family? Who allows them to spend their stolen oil money in this way?
Check your premises. The West has been killing Muslim children by the millions.
The "West"? Which West is that? And where and when were these "millions" of children killed?
A half million Iraqi children age five and under died as a result of sanctions against Iraq.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4
And then came war:
That is the tally for a fifteen year period in just one country.
First of all....500,000 aint "millions"..., and even if accurate which is unlikely, an easy argument could be made that the blood is on the hands of the Iraqi Govt. B) your University of Google, cut and paste research has been proven inaccurate and is not worth of further debate. Kind of silly in fact.
Now, if you were to claim that the West has killed "millions" of Western children, you'd be accurate....it's called legal, On-Demand Abortion....more than 1 million per year for 40 years in America alone. But I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the concern you've expressed for muslims and the military is not extended to those 40 million killed. Am I right?
No, you are wrong about that just as you are wrong to summarily dismiss the killing of Muslim children. All human life is precious.
Sure thing....does it make it even more precious when you use incredibly inflated, thoroughly discredited Death Toll numbers in an effort to make your point? Just wondering, it appears that you have many sets of rules for many different occasions.
The figure of 500,000 thousand Iraqi children age five and under dying during sanctions did not come from the Iraqis. It came from the UN who were the same people who enacted the sanctions against Iraq at American request.
So now your excuse is that when we kill kids and count the dead we inflate the number we claimed we killed and then say it was "worth it?" That's simply not rational.
So if you taunt someone and they react badly then that proves that you were right all along? Grow up and get a job.
Nope they can always refute the taunt by a proportional reaction; free will works both ways.
But it does not warrant violence if its just humour, irony and words. And fear of reprisal is out of the question as acceptable reaction.
What sort of job do you do? Nite club troller?
Of course it doesn't warrant violence but you engage in such ridicule specifically because you know it will provoke violence. That doesn't make you the better man.
Try a simple experiment... go hungry for a day and then notice how your brain functions and how you react to things.
Fascist bankster cabal deperately seeking war to cover and distract the people from their crimes. They are masters at fear-mongering, so don't fall for their ploys. Their evil criminal empire is sinking fast, so don't get caught in the undertow. God speed.
It would be funny, but for the fact that it is just so seventeenth century.
The "muslim world." A world where hatred and violence are not a symptoms but surety.
The sooner the memory of some faggot named Mohammad is wiped from the Earth, the sooner the Earth will be a better place for all.
Where are ALL the legeons of peaceful and tolerant Muslims championed so much about worldwide? Are they not in the steets for peace or "a piece," just like their perverted prophet of lies and oppressive bullshit. The vast majority are cowards at home, hiding behind their incorporated religion of ignorance and death.
FUCK MOHAMMAD
+1000.
Butt-fuck Mohammed, the lying, thieving, murdering, pedophile.
If athey really want to stop insulting their prophet, they should make about 100 millon
living insults to Mohammed change their name.
last moment of the US ambassador at LIBYA, eye witness claim that he was alive .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PwIivEXhus&feature=player_embedded
It is almost as if this shit is being done on purpose to srit Muslim unrest.
Good thing for the US, the women in the Muslim world won't be mad as well, since they would be hung for reading.
Are all religious people dickheads or what? You got your muslims that want to kill everyone that don't believe. Its true no matter what Hillary sezs. I've known it for years. Catholic priests queering young boys, Amishmen begging car rides to work construction with their Skilsaws. On and on... It all seems so pitifully phony to me.
Presidents have gotten re-elected because of war.
I disagree with the disapproving tone of this article. Fuck the muslems with their imaginary god and their violent child-raping prophet. In the 'developed' world, as Tyler puts it, we had to endure violent religious oppression for centuries by the christian church. And now in Europe we should welcome another intolerant violent religion that wants to put its mark on society? No thank you. It would be as if all these people in the past who fought for freedom and freedom of expression fought for nothing. A lot may be wrong with western civilization but freedom of thought and expression led to the onset of modern sciences of which we benefit today. Our lives would be a lot shorter, more painfull and unhappier without them.
I seriously doubt that naked Mohammed cartoons will lead to a cure for cancer. But you keep trying. Just don't use your crayons to mark up the walls.
If there is going to be a cure for cancer, chances are bigger that it will come for modern sciences than from an inmaginary god. Do you really think that without freedom of thought etc. we would have had industrialization, a cure for polio, etc.? Unbelievers and free-thinkers in Europe were put to death, tortured, mocked etc. by the christian church. But people persevered and brought down the influence of the church. Jesus and other religious figures are being ridiculed all the time in Europe. But I don't see any christians burning embassies. Why? Because christianity evolved and lost influence anyway. If you give in to tyranny -wether religious or political- then you will find yourself on a sliding slope.
OK, then. I'm writing a check to St. Jude so that they can cure kids with cancer by drawing floppy tits on the Virgin Mary.
Better send that check to a cancer research institute.
St. Jude is unlike any other pediatric treatment and research facility. Discoveries made here have completely changed how the world treats children with cancer and other catastrophic diseases. With research and patient care under one roof, St. Jude is where some of today's most gifted researchers are able to do science more quickly.
http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=f87d4c2a71fca210VgnVC...
No mention of how cartoon genitalia provides efficacious treatment.
Never heard of St.Jude before. I only know that religion inspired contribution to medicine entailed the letting of vains and the use of leaches. Everything else after that was inspired by modern science. Without enlightenment, St.Jude would now be perfecting the letting of vains in order to cure cancer.
Religious satire by the way has a long history in Europe. The church was not happy with that and if you would do it in the middle ages, you would end at the stake. Satire is important in bringing down tyrannies, religious ones or political ones.
Don't likesatiret? Accept that people don't agree with you. And no, cartoons do not kill, people indoctrinated with dogmas do.
I'm an atheist. I already know that the Muslims don't agree with me on that. But how does it benefit me to insult their beliefs? No Muslim has ever caused me the least bit of harm.
The fact that you are an atheist is for many muslems already a reason to kill you. Wherever muslems are the majority, minorities such as believers of other religions or atheists are under danger. If you want to know how these groups are being treated I suggest you visit www.thereligionofpeace.com
No Muslim has ever caused me the least bit of harm. But I'm supposed to ignore the reality of my own experience and hide under the bed in fear with you? Grow some balls. Not everyone is out to get you.
Go and live in a getto in Europe or in a muslem country. In the least case you will find that your freedom of expression is reduced. In the worst case you'll end up in a hospital for the mere fact that you looked at someone for a split second too long. I am not afraid but I am no fool either.
But I don't live there. I live here. Why resort to playing let's pretend in order to justify your baseless fears?
Think Pearl Harbor on a grand sacle.....
If you want NWO (emphasis on WORLD) you need to get rid of those pesky Mooslums, they probably had some issues about NWO... at least the ones that were not bought of first...
Oh gee. I'm so sorry that people whose "religion" is "kill the infidel" are infuriated by a cartoon that slights their prophet. This article is beyond dumb.
-------------------------------
Tyler Durden wrote:
Uhm, Tyler, is there some aspect of the concept of Freedom of Speech that you do not understand? Please let me know.
-- Paul D. Bain
paulbain@PObox.com
--------------------------------------
American troops are dying for your right to make bathroom jokes about Mohammed. Hallelujah!
No, American troops are dying to keep banker supply chains of drugs and oil free flowing. If you think they are dying for the First Amendment you might want to protest in one of our predesignated 10 x 10 boxes behind the dump.
Of course the cause is much deeper than these cartoons but it's a fact that they are a flash point and US troops have been killed as a result.
Provocations? The west is provoking the placid Muslims? Fuck off and die, the Muslims can go burn themselves up, who gives a shit and let them destroy their wealth and die, die, die. This article really is idiotic -- no film provoked the Muslims they are already fucking INSANE. Only a decadent west would be handwringing this one. Islam is a monster and needs to die. And for you weenies and pillow biters who think the west made all this happen - stop looking in the mirror, it isn't about YOU. It's about a shithead religion that is medieval and populated by stupid idiots who are dying off and will destroy themselves only a little faster by warring against themselves. Just stand back and let it happen. Sometimes you let the fire burn and it renews the forest. Islam is death.
WOW are you stupid.
Sounds like you have the final solution.
Do you know who else had the final solution?
" It's about a shithead religion that is medieval and populated by stupid idiots who are dying off and will destroy themselves only a little faster by warring against themselves. "
Thank God it has never happened with us christians!
You Sir, are a vile little person.
Krugman et al have been repeating since 2009 that we need a massive war to get out of this never ending recession, and look what happens! All the fuckers in government are listening to the nobel cretin.
You might think you hate the brown guys, the yellow guys, the white guys, along with whatever silly traditions and beliefs they defend, but know this: You have been conditioned by overwhelming bombardment of bullshit to hate. Sorry, I am not joining in the hate-fest. You would have to be a ripe cunt to enjoy pouring petrol on the fire of raging violence that we're all capable of, just so you can have a laugh at someone else's expense.
It's no accident that the same fuckers who post derogatory bullshit about the china/japan troubles to goad them on are the ones who constantly post to incite hatred of muslims and christians. Some people are going to a lot of trouble to create a global conflict, and the comment posts at most msm sites reflect a microcosm of this common goal.
“The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zYlOU7Fpk&feature=youtube_gdata
This is exactly as scripted by the US imposter.
Hoping to read the following *update on ZH:
Please disregard the sentiment expressed in the previous article; the authors have been sacked. That is all.
Sheesh, it's just an illustration of another muslim asshole, a little prick, and a couple of Islamic nuts.
Nice to see Obamas ally France is helping his cause!
Can anyone please provide me with Gods twitter address.
@god
https://twitter.com/god
;-)
lol
Oh my, we simply must appease the barbarians and hope they like us.
How is not insulting folks an act of appeasement?
Who defines what is insulting? What if I define all negative criticism as insulting? Does that mean there shouldn't be any criticism?
You have no right not to be insulted.
I was raised to be courteous. It never occurred to me that a purposeless and blatant disregard for the beliefs of other was a virtue.
Free speech does not have to be curteous. It's nice and I like it that way, but that cannot be a legal or moral requirement that can be imposed on others.
If you dont' want to listen, you can leave (or not come to listen). Your feeling this or that way does not give you right to force me to say what you like.
I understand. But what I don't understand is how insulting others yields positive results. What is the direct benefit of drawing balls on Mohammed? Is peace, freedom or prosperity advanced in any way whatsoever? If insults lead to a better world can you give me some specific targets for ridicule so that I can get busy angering people right away? How long before I turn a profit on such activity?
Courteous is nice. So is treating thy neighbor as thyself.
A vocal part of the Moslem world wants us to put limits on our free speech, but they love our freedom of religion, since it allows them to build mosques wherever they like. On the other hand, that particular freedom doesn't translate well over there. The average two-time offending thief in Saudi Arabia can still count on one hand the number of churches in the entire country.
"It's almost as if someone is actively trying to force the Muslim world to launch an all out war against the "developed" west."
Ya think?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGo1DqmfHjY
Maybe "they" are trying to get the Muslim world to destroy itself. An "insulting" comic printed every month could generate a significant problem for the Muslim world or at least those who like to riot.
There must be more than this
So god was born and we in his
image of fear and love
look down from up above
- DJM
DP bitchez
Everyone's looking for a fight, but I wonder who's man enough to show up at the Marine/Army recruiter...
Maybe we could get pissed at our own government instead of following the planned script to WWIII. Just a thought...
Alas, it's much easier to stand beside the bully instead of facing him.
Almost nobody seems to take this seriously...after all, freedom of expression is the real issue now, especially when your face is an icon in a blog. Freedom, rights, (cheap oil), that's all we need.
Tyler, thanks for your words.
Charlie Hebdo is a generally kinda pro-Israel / anti-arab satyrical libertarian left wing news paper just so you know. They bash all religion leaders & hierarchy but have an afinity for taking the piss out of Islam. Cui Bono in this case are the editors & artists, its shares are split in-between them, it is not the property of a big group or something.
I think that was unnecessary and dangerous for french citizens around the world. I'm guessing either psyops or plain french satyrical arrogance in order to pump their crumbling sales volume...
As a froggy i'm not impressed and even though the muslim world seems to have had a very primary, beastial reaction to the shitty movie it is stupid of them to publish such a (mediocre) front page. It's not even funny and lacking the legendary french tact... ;)
Just where can one acccess the cartoons?
Humanize these deities, fine, when do we get a comic of Jesus taking a dump?
Relevant