bluto Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) It says on the News that 1.6 Billion people will be offended by this weeks front cover of that French magazine. Probably the majority will no see it, but they are likely to be told to be offended anyway. It has an image of Allah with a badge or poster saying, "Je suis Charlie". This kinda sums up the problem. They consider ANY image of Allah - no matter how sympathetic and lovingly done - to be utterly offensive, reprehensible and unforgivable. It comes down to how you interpret the writings of mediaeval scholars. Christians had something similar handed down to them - via Moses - about 'shallt not create graven images'. Art and communication in the Western world progressed through art being used to help communicate the Christian tales. Islam has not had that benefit, thus it has not mellowed in its interpretation of ancient writings, I believe. That's why, IMHO, modern society with its freedom of speech appears to be so problematic for some religious people. ETA: This Guardian article about it contains the #offending# image. Don't click if you're easily offended... http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jan/13/charlie-hebdo-cover-magazine-prophet-muhammad Edited January 13, 2015 by bluto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted January 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I know Jack Shit about Allah or the phrophet Mohammed, but I know one thing. Not liking anyone drawing pictures of them doesn't justify mass murder, kidnapping and bringing terror on innocent people. I'm reasonably confident on that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 There are many images of mohammed (spelling?) that have been published over the centuries. I'm sure that ANY god or omnipotent entity would be secure enough in their own identity and abilities not to take offence at a cartoon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) The cowardly, barbaric, inhuman, senseless killings last week serve no god, man or phrophet . That said do i feel that my freedom of expression is under threat because a handful of arty types in Paris feel their right to offend, incite and generally rip the pish out of a peaceful religion is threatened..? Non monsieur! Its not my way of life, or a lucrative little earner i have cut out that relies on me offending, hurting millions of PEACEFUL followers of a faith, I don't feel there is anything i want to say today, that i could have said last week, which i now feel frightened to say. But then again i haven't made a living out of attacking a faith with over a billion peaceful followers because it makes me seem more smug and arrogant to say its justified satire. Again! The cowardly, barbaric, inhuman, senseless killings last week serve no god, man or phrophet . Edited January 13, 2015 by Lord Pityme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isle Of Bute Saint Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I know Jack Shit about Allah or the phrophet Mohammed, but I know one thing. Not liking anyone drawing pictures of them doesn't justify mass murder, kidnapping and bringing terror on innocent people. I'm reasonably confident on that one. I know Jack Shit about Allah or the phrophet Mohammed, but I know one thing. Not liking anyone drawing pictures of them doesn't justify mass murder, kidnapping and bringing terror on innocent people. I'm reasonably confident on that one.The Koran is not an evil book telling Muslims to go out and slaughter infidels as extremists call us. The Muslim bible has been hijacked by extremists hell bent in turning the world into Muslim that is the ultimate goal. Now we are told there sleeper cells who will do atrocities and large scale killing. It's time politicians dropped the political richness and start taking action against extremists. If you are known to have been in any hot spot , write extremists views online to the extent you sound dangerous then you should be put into purpose built internment camps maybe on a remote Scottish island as was done with the Italians in the second world war. Extremists need extreme measures to stop innocent life being lost. Should not be forgotten that many Muslims are peaceful and are against extremists to their religion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The Koran is not an evil book telling Muslims to go out and slaughter infidels as extremists call us. The Muslim bible has been hijacked by extremists hell bent in turning the world into Muslim that is the ultimate goal. Now we are told there sleeper cells who will do atrocities and large scale killing. It's time politicians dropped the political richness and start taking action against extremists. If you are known to have been in any hot spot , write extremists views online to the extent you sound dangerous then you should be put into purpose built internment camps maybe on a remote Scottish island as was done with the Italians in the second world war. Extremists need extreme measures to stop innocent life being lost. Should not be forgotten that many Muslims are peaceful and are against extremists to their religion. Oh FFS no!You can't intern people for saying things you don't agree with. Esp governments as they invariably use this to forward their own aims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The Turks captured the kurdish leader years ago and imprisoned him on a remote island with 3000 troops guarding him. Didn't stop the kurds fight for freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 It says on the News that 1.6 Billion people will be offended by this weeks front cover of that French magazine. Probably the majority will no see it, but they are likely to be told to be offended anyway. There are allegedly something like 6 or 7 billion Christians in the world who get offended by things like same sex marriages but few if any go looking for revenge or committing mass murder when Jesus gets depicted up to all kinds of nasty stunts. Was anything said when Eric Idle sang 'Always Look On The Bright Side?' There again I live in a country where up until a few years ago slightly differing branches of Christianity blew one another to smithereens and shot one another's heads off. For why I just don't know. Oh, wait a minute. It was politics. That's a bit better. When an apparently endless stream of young men are prepared to become martyrs for their cause, the situation is almost impossible to handle. What are they promised? Seventeen virgins in the hereafter or some such? Incidentally, what do the female martyrs get? What can be done to stop them? Probably nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 There are allegedly something like 6 or 7 billion Christians in the world who get offended by things like same sex marriages but few if any go looking for revenge or committing mass murder when Jesus gets depicted up to all kinds of nasty stunts. Was anything said when Eric Idle sang 'Always Look On The Bright Side?' There again I live in a country where up until a few years ago slightly differing branches of Christianity blew one another to smithereens and shot one another's heads off. For why I just don't know. Oh, wait a minute. It was politics. That's a bit better. When an apparently endless stream of young men are prepared to become martyrs for their cause, the situation is almost impossible to handle. What are they promised? Seventeen virgins in the hereafter or some such? Incidentally, what do the female martyrs get? What can be done to stop them? Probably nothing. 72. Dunno why. There must be some obscure religious reason for that lucky number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The quran apparently doesn't promise any number of virgins at all - not even one.Gonna be a lot of disappointed jihadis in heaven... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The quran apparently doesn't promise any number of virgins at all - not even one. You're not quoting the Mullah Interpreter of choice for suicidal nutters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 A little exaggeration there, I be thinking. I was being facetious. I've got a rough idea of the world's population. Technically there are more Christians than Muslims. Allegedly. Who counts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 There is no heaven - there was a Heaven17, but that's another thread.Heaven 17 - that'll be the 2 sluts you were looking for?So if there's no heaven and there's not 12,20,24 or 72 virgins waiting for me I think I'll give the holy war a miss... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I was being facetious. I've got a rough idea of the world's population. Technically there are more Christians than Muslims. Allegedly. Who counts? Monte Christo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 You're not quoting the Mullah Interpreter of choice for suicidal nutters.That could be Google translate judging by the interpretation it gave on the South American consortium thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I was being facetious. I've got a rough idea of the world's population. Technically there are more Christians than Muslims. Allegedly. Who counts?The same folk who count the crowd at Sellik park? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) The cowardly, barbaric, inhuman, senseless killings last week serve no god, man or phrophet . That said do i feel that my freedom of expression is under threat because a handful of arty types in Paris feel their right to offend, incite and generally rip the pish out of a peaceful religion is threatened..? Non monsieur! Its not my way of life, or a lucrative little earner i have cut out that relies on me offending, hurting millions of PEACEFUL followers of a faith, I don't feel there is anything i want to say today, that i could have said last week, which i now feel frightened to say. But then again i haven't made a living out of attacking a faith with over a billion peaceful followers because it makes me seem more smug and arrogant to say its justified satire. Again! The cowardly, barbaric, inhuman, senseless killings last week serve no god, man or phrophet . Aye, pretty much how I see it. I'm an atheist, and also strongly favour the right to freedom of expression. However.... One of the most balanced comments made in terms of this whole affair was made last week by no other than Limmy! I'm paraphrasing something he posted on Twitter, but, to all intents and purposes, he stated that while he might not agree with or relate to someone or their belief system, he doesn't feel the need to "poke them with a stick". We are quite fortunate in 'the West' to have considerable rights to freedom of expression when compared with other peoples (and yes, I'm including women and those of other and no faiths in some of the more radical Muslim states etc.) throughout the world. However, with rights come responsibilities. I'm just not convinced that it is big or clever to poke someone with a stick. Satire is fine, but it generally has to be laced with a degree of humour and be framed in such a way that it isn't simply inflammatory for the sake of it. I also share your distaste surrounding all the arty and luvvy types jumping on this bandwagon - je suis a bunch of Charlies right enough. Edited January 13, 2015 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Aye, pretty much how I see it.I'm an atheist, and also strongly favour the right to freedom of expression.However....One of the most balanced comments made in terms of this whole affair was made last week by no other than Limmy! I'm paraphrasing something he posted on Twitter, but, to all intents and purposes, he stated that while he might not agree with or relate to someone or their belief system, he doesn't feel the need to "poke them with a stick".We are quite fortunate in 'the West' to have considerable rights to freedom of expression when compared with other peoples (and yes, I'm including women and those of other and no faiths in some of the more radical Muslim states etc.) throughout the world. However, with rights come responsibilities. I'm just not convinced that it is big or clever to poke someone with a stick. Satire is fine, but it generally has to be laced with a degree of humour and be framed in such a way that it isn't simply inflammatory for the sake of it.I also share your distaste surrounding all the arty and luvvy types jumping on this bandwagon - je suis a bunch of Charlies right enough. You gotta laugh at all journos who leapt in front if tv cameras and radio mics last week to say "an attack on Charlie hebdo is an attack on the free press" Then when asked "so you'll be publishing the cartoons in question too?" To a man they shat it...! That tells you they were offensive and seemingly from the guardians of our press unnecessary to publish in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) You gotta laugh at all journos who leapt in front if tv cameras and radio mics last week to say "an attack on Charlie hebdo is an attack on the free press" Then when asked "so you'll be publishing the cartoons in question too?" To a man they shat it...! That tells you they were offensive and seemingly from the guardians of our press unnecessary to publish in the UK. Bollocks. The Charlie people were murdered just for drawing cartoons. That IS an attack on freedom and the free press. Or do you really think that is laughable? Other people have published similar stuff. (I linked to this morning's Guardian to show today's cartoon). How can you possibly say they were offensive? You CAN say repressive nutters who have impossibly thin skin and scarily heightened perceptions of what may be deemed offensive by THEM, and that THEY don't like them. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them in the real world. And they don't offend people unless people want to take offence. The queen has disliked some of the drawings and paintings done of her by that doesn't mean they are genuinely offensive. I agree that not everyone needs to publish Muhammed stuff, but if the few who wish to do so are going to be terrorised for that, then I think it right that THEY should be supported. Consider the Fatwa on Salman Rushdie. I had found that his style of writing bored me, put me off, so I'd stopped buying his books. I now have a copy of his Satanic Verses, (unread) just as a token of support. ETA: Sevco fans have intimidated the Scottish Press and broadcasters into not using the word LIQUIDATION in reference to them. It happened. It is a reality. They find it offensive. The Press in Scotland never mention it. Ra Peepul have terrorised them into silence. Shocking. That is no good for reality, for the country in general. Would you come out in support of ra Peepul's point of view? Edited January 13, 2015 by bluto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 One wid do,even just once a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Bollocks. The Charlie people were murdered just for drawing cartoons. That IS an attack on freedom and the free press. Or do you really think that is laughable? Other people have published similar stuff. (I linked to this morning's Guardian to show today's cartoon). How can you possibly say they were offensive? You CAN say repressive nutters who have impossibly thin skin and scarily heightened perceptions of what may be deemed offensive by THEM, and that THEY don't like them. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong them in the real world. And they don't offend people unless people want to take offence. The queen has disliked some of the drawings and paintings done of her by that doesn't mean they are genuinely offensive. I agree that not everyone needs to publish Muhammed stuff, but if the few who wish to do so are going to be terrorised for that, then I think it right that THEY should be suported. Consider the Fatwa on Salman Rushdie. I had found that his style of writing bored me, put me off, so I'd stopped buying his books. I now have a copy of his Satanic Verses, (unread) just as a token of support. ETA: Sevco fans have intimidated the Scottish Press and broadcasters into not using the word LIQUIDATION in reference to them. It happened. It is a reality. They find it offensive. The Press in Scotland never mention it. Ra Peepul have terrorised them into silence. Shocking. That is no good for reality, for the country in general. Would you come out in support of ra Peepul's point of view? Wow... I had to drop a trail of bread crumbs to find my way back out of that post! Forgetting (and you really should) everything you've thrown in their from the queen to sevco (she still wants them to pony up to Her revenue & customs)to deflect from my points. The murderers are murderers they have no justifiable reason for their atrocities. There are however tens of millions of peaceful ordinary muslims who see this continued attack on their religion by a couple of dozen arty parisians as senseless and offensive. What you are suggesting is that we should side with the couple of dozen arty lot and uphold their right to offend for financial gain. The cartoon today is nothing compared to the ones that actually offends muslims, and the acid test for me is all broadcast and print media in the UK agree because they refuse to publish them, they see them as a senseless way to unnecessarily offend people. Call that what you will? I choose to call it tolerance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I know Jack Shit about Allah or the phrophet Mohammed, but I know one thing. Not liking anyone drawing pictures of them doesn't justify mass murder, kidnapping and bringing terror on innocent people. I'm reasonably confident on that one. point accepted but would you broadcast your views on the knuckledraggers of the celtic support and then make sure the clientele of the wig & pen knew who and where you were? The killers were wrong according to my beliefs and views, they also probably felt that lashing out in this way would help their own cause. In the west, they are perceived to have set their cause back. in the Muslim world they will be perceived as having struck a heroic blow for their cause against those that control the media and use it to oppress their kind/ There was no need to provoke these people, especially in the racially tense atmosphere in France. At the end of the day, it is usually someone innocent who pays for other's so-called right to free speech. Social progress is a process, not a series of events initiated at the random behest of the self-appointed intelligensia and you wont imbue Islam with your own version of western values and behaviours by simply ridiculing it's followers. it never ceases to amaze me when a partially educated self-styled and self-appointed intellectual elite think it is ok to provoke less privileged and less well-educated groups who are already feeling disenfranchised and mistreated, then proclaim them to be evil when members of those groups react in a very predictable violent way. Not everyone has the power of words and many who do still find they are not listened to. To then mock those groups is insensitive and ultimately suicidal. Satire is best used as a way of knocking the establishment and the privileged members of society, using it to further alienate the left-behinds of the world is playing with fire and is actually a bit sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The Koran is not an evil book telling Muslims to go out and slaughter infidels as extremists call us. The Muslim bible has been hijacked by extremists hell bent in turning the world into Muslim that is the ultimate goal. Now we are told there sleeper cells who will do atrocities and large scale killing. It's time politicians dropped the political richness and start taking action against extremists. If you are known to have been in any hot spot , write extremists views online to the extent you sound dangerous then you should be put into purpose built internment camps maybe on a remote Scottish island as was done with the MOSTLY INNOCENT Italians in the second world war. Extremists need extreme measures to stop innocent life being lost. Should not be forgotten that many Muslims are peaceful and are against extremists to their religion. FIXED THAT ONE FOR YOU Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 point accepted but would you broadcast your views on the knuckledraggers of the celtic support and then make sure the clientele of the wig & pen knew who and where you were? The killers were wrong according to my beliefs and views, they also probably felt that lashing out in this way would help their own cause. In the west, they are perceived to have set their cause back. in the Muslim world they will be perceived as having struck a heroic blow for their cause against those that control the media and use it to oppress their kind/ There was no need to provoke these people, especially in the racially tense atmosphere in France. At the end of the day, it is usually someone innocent who pays for other's so-called right to free speech. Social progress is a process, not a series of events initiated at the random behest of the self-appointed intelligensia and you wont imbue Islam with your own version of western values and behaviours by simply ridiculing it's followers. it never ceases to amaze me when a partially educated self-styled and self-appointed intellectual elite think it is ok to provoke less privileged and less well-educated groups who are already feeling disenfranchised and mistreated, then proclaim them to be evil when members of those groups react in a very predictable violent way. Not everyone has the power of words and many who do still find they are not listened to. To then mock those groups is insensitive and ultimately suicidal. Satire is best used as a way of knocking the establishment and the privileged members of society, using it to further alienate the left-behinds of the world is playing with fire and is actually a bit sick. Hear, hear.... Remember the french only take on/colonise where the biggest threat is pointy fruit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 There are however tens of millions of peaceful ordinary muslims who see this continued attack on their religion by a couple of dozen arty parisians as senseless and offensive. What you are suggesting is that we should side with the couple of dozen arty lot and uphold their right to offend for financial gain. The cartoon today is nothing compared to the ones that actually offends muslims, and the acid test for me is all broadcast and print media in the UK agree because they refuse to publish them, they see them as a senseless way to unnecessarily offend people. Call that what you will? I choose to call it tolerance. I see. Any depiction of an imaginary entity is 'an attack'? So much for Santa and the Tooth Fairy, You choose to ignore the point about the 50 million 'The Rangers' fans around the world who are offended by the linking of the word LIQUIDATION' with their club. And ignore that they have intimidated the Scottish media into not using it. Instead the Scottish Press and BBC have come up with complicated, convoluted, long-winded, incredible explanations as to why Sevco started in Division 4 - and it's possibly why you haven't understood how BIG a deal it is going into liquidation. It won't be easy to climb back out. I understand that. You don't seem to think so. Maybe I understand that because my knowledge of liquidation has not been altered. And that's because I don't trust the media. I believe they are, in the main, cowardly and more likely to take the easiest route out of any possible confrontation - rather than be honest and address it head on. You have a weird, to me, appreciation of the press. Tolerant?! Nah... For instance, I wouldn't call the Sun's depiction of Liverpool fans as tolerant. And I offer my apologies for writing something too difficult for you. I'll try to lower my standards to that of your favoured MSM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.