Attack on magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris.

  • Thread starter Dennisch
  • 897 comments
  • 37,556 views
prisonermonkeys
And I want people to exercise common sense and good judgement when they say what they say, and to realise that they can't hide behind free speech if it upsets someone. I never said Charlie Hebdo had it coming or brought it on themselves - you just assumed that I felt that way because I don't share the same opinion on free speech. If you read the article I linked to, this stands out:

Now maybe all of this has been shaped by our Racial Discrimination Act, which makes it a crime to use language that offends, insults, demeans or belittles anyone on the basis of their race. It doesn't mean that you can't say it - just that if you do, then you need to be prepared to face up to the consequences.


That's one example, and one example does not excuse it. It doesn't matter if they are targeting everyone when they consistently target everyone with the same stereotypical caricatures.
Click to expand...

I'll just leave this one here then:

pc.jpg


If you'd start with censoring everything that might upset others, we can as well start with forbidding all cartoons in newspapers, as they will always 'offend' one or more people. Cartoons are intended to be caricatures, and as their main use in newspapers is to criticize or question, there will always people that don't agree or feel stepped on their toes.

There's also a massive difference, in my humble opinion, between racism and criticism. If it's racist to question certain practices of a religion or to mock them in any way, then South Park, Family Guy, The Simpsons, The Big Bang Theory, etc. should all be banned from TV screens because they also do that repeatedly.
 
Small update

The terrorist took another vehicle this morning.

They seem to have gone to an industrial place where hostages where taken. The building is localized where they are and helicopters are flying above. Hostages inside.

http://www.leparisien.fr/charlie-he...ver-les-freres-kouachi-09-01-2015-4431731.php

9h46. Deux morts et 20 blessés. Selon nos informations, les échanges de coups de feu entre les deux suspects et les gendarmes ont fait deux morts et 20 blessés.

2 dead 20 wounded. Exchange of fire between police and terrorists

9h43. L'échange des coups de feu a eu lieu vers 9 heures. L'échange des coups de feu à hauteur de la commune de Dammartin-en-Goële, à environ une demi-heure de route de la zone où étaient recherchés les fugitifs depuis jeudi, a eu lieu vers 9 heures.

Shots were fired at the location around 9 o clock. They are in Dammartin-en-Goële, about 30 minuten from the location where the police searched yesterday.
Click to expand...

2 dead 20 wounded according to Parisien and their sources. People on the phone in the village say no shots fired. Information not complete clear on the situation.

Pffff quelle merde!
 
Last edited:
prisonermonkeys
No, we have the same amount. We just have a law that amounts to "sure, you can say it - but if you do, you can't hide behind freedom of speech if someone takes offence", largely because we also have freedom from persecution, and we consider both to be equally important. Discrimination is a form of persecution, and so someone engaging in free speech does not get to override someone else's freedom from persecution.
Click to expand...

Freedom from persecution laws have been set up to protect citizens of a state from state persecution based on religion or ethnicity or gender. The press does not belong to and is not controlled by the state (free press). Anti-Discrimination laws have been made to protect one (legal) person from discrimination of another (legal) person.
All this is irrelevant as the attackers choose not to go to court.

haitch40
Specifically the state should restrict freedoms when it starts to infringe upon the freedoms of another person idea ie the harm principle.
Click to expand...

The state power is divided into the legislative part that makes laws and the judicative part that decides if laws apply to a case. Sometimes two laws made by the legislative contradict themselves and have to be weighed by the judicative, a sometimes long and difficult act. But this is also irrelevant as there were no courts and laws involved in this attack.

prisonermonkeys
Well, you set the laws that you think are best for you, and we'll set the laws that we think are best for us.
Click to expand...

You don't set any laws, as long as you are no dictator. Even if you are a member of some parliament, there will be many others that you have to discuss your law ideas with. If you are a citizen of a democratic state, you can elected a representative and he will bring your ideas into the discussion. I know it's a complicated process with lots of frustration and it takes so long and in the end nobody is really pleased as they have to make compromises, but it's a system where people can live together in relative peace.

So i hope the attackers will be brought to court and to justice. And there will be a verdict that i will respect because of the long process and the arguments that have been thoroughly checked and weighed. But i don't think the arguments include freedom of speech or discrimination or persecution.
 
doblocruiser
2 dead 20 wounded according to Parisien and their sources. People on the phone in the village say no shots fired. Information not complete clear on the situation.
Click to expand...

From what I'm reading on the Belgian news, the firefight between the police and the terrorists took place on a motorway, before they took the hostages. That might explain why the people in the village say they didn't hear any shots.

Edit: now they say that the firefight didn't result in any casualties
 
Last edited:
prisonermonkeys
Well, you set the laws that you think are best for you, and we'll set the laws that we think are best for us.
Click to expand...
I don't really get the relevance of this comment, but setting laws that people think are best is how we ended up with slavery - and indeed Australia.

Laws should be based on reason, logic and rationality, not feeling. That way you don't end up with laws saying that if someone feels offended by something you've expressed you're a criminal - because there is no logical, rational or reasonable way you can prevent someone from taking offence at something.
 
prisonermonkeys
Yes, it does - even if race does not equal religion. The wording of the Act is broad enough that it has become a catch-all for any kind of discriminatory language. People are very rarely prosecuted under it; it works best as a deterrent, or more accurately, a clear obstacle. Like I said, it doesn't outlaw discriminatory language - it just acts as a reminder that if you discriminate, then you need to accept the consequences.
Click to expand...
I've looked that RDA up and it is pretty much the exact same as our Allgemeines Gleichstellungsgesetz, AGG. It primarily is a means to ensure there's no discrimination when it comes to jobs or whatever, to prevent segregation.

We've got a specific law that prohibits abuse towards religious groups, so in total, a similar legal situation.

There's a huge difference between satire and abuse, though, for a start, and I'd assume that people, especially those in charge of the judiciary system, should be capable to differentiate. And breaking either of these laws will get you fined (most likely) or, at worst, imprisoned (highly unlikely to come up with an insult that is that severe). You can talk about your "consequences" all day long, the matter of fact is, whatever consequences you're thinking off, they have nothing, absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. And neither does your RDA.
 
prisonermonkeys
To begin with, sure. But if someone is using the same caricatures over and over again, at what point does it stop being satire and start being abuse?
Click to expand...
At no point. The difference isn't how often it's said, but what is said.

Example time!

If I said that I feel like Islam is a religion of violence and intolerance (I don't), it's criticism. Express it with a cartoon and it's a caricature.
If I said that Muslims are a bunch of incestuous, sheep-shagging war mongers (I don't), it's abuse. Express it with a cartoon and it's still abuse.

Repeating either doesn't change the nature of the message. Even if repeating the first upsets someone. Hell, I've had a customer snap and rage at me for calling him "guter Mann" (good sir)... Whether something upsets someone or not is clearly no indicator as to whether it actually is abuse or not, either. And I bet I could get someone to be upset by repeating something nice over and over. Just have to find someone with bed enough of a temper, I suppose.
 
Satire is a form of comedy that is often quite subtle. It is extremely easy to cross a line and present something that you believe is comedy, but is in fact abusive. Oftentimes it relies on knowing your audience just as much as it does knowing who is the target of your satire.
 
Luminis
At no point. The difference isn't how often it's said, but what is said.
Click to expand...
It also matters if the message is being directed specifically at an individual or not. Publishing an article, book, newspaper, cartoon, film, song or anything that contains potentially offensive material categorically does not constitute an act of abuse. Just as was the case with the release of Monty Python's Life of Brian, some people go out of their way to be offended... most of the most vociferous (and threatening) critics of that film likely never saw it, and protests were arranged before the film was even released. Similarly, the Mohamed guest-edited edition of Charlie Hebdo was not even released before their offices were fire-bombed. I would suggest that if one doesn't like the kind of humour espoused by comedians and satirists like Charb, the Pythons, Jerry Sadowitz, George Carlin, Richard Pryor, Lenny Bruce etc., then don't buy their material, watch their shows, check out their Twitter feed etc.. It's not hard to completely ignore people/material that one finds unacceptable. The fact that it is out there and relatively easy to find doesn't change that.
 
prisonermonkeys
Satire is a form of comedy that is often quite subtle. It is extremely easy to cross a line and present something that you believe is comedy, but is in fact abusive. Oftentimes it relies on knowing your audience just as much as it does knowing who is the target of your satire.
Click to expand...
Well, I doubt that extremists who'll kill everyone who denounces their religion were ever considered part of the target audience of Charlie Hebdo. They knew their audience, what they presented in their magazine wasn't offensive to their audience and wasn't offensive to the overwhelming majority of Muslims, either, as it seems.

Just because a nutcase becomes enraged at something doesn't mean he's right (edit: or rather, that it is factually abusive). Should I refrain from calling my customers "good sir" from now on (which most find rather nice) just because one of them thought it offensive?
 
French police have a town in northern France surrounded as the two suspects have barricaded themselves in a school and have taken a hostage.

tarnheld
If somebody repeats the same arguments over and over again on an internet forum, at what point does it stop being a discussion and start being trolling?
Click to expand...
I don't know. Probably around the time you start expecting somebody to simply give up because you think you have adequately made your argument, even though that someone's sticking to their argument implies that you have not convinced them at all.

Oh, hey. Would you look at that - it sounds like exactly what you're doing!

See, I can be persuaded if the argument is convincing enough. But your argument is not convincing at all. So don't blame your failure to make a persuasive argument on my inability to be persuaded by your poor persuasion skills.
 
Around 13.00 a new shooting in Paris. Man has entered a small grocery store with around 30 people inside. Started to shoot with automatic weapon. Not confirmed if the shooter was halted by police.

I have no further confirmed info.

update: shooter is still inside the store and has several hostages.
update2: Jewish grosery store, shooter inside with several hostages
update3: Heavily armed and extremely dangerous, has 5 hostages.
 
Last edited:
doblocruiser
Around 13.00 a new shooting in Paris. Man has entered a small grocery store with around 30 people inside. Started to shoot with automatic weapon. Not confirmed if the shooter was halted by police.

I have no further confirmed info.
Click to expand...

He's believed to be the same man who shot the policewoman yesterday.
 
prisonermonkeys
I don't know. Probably around the time you start expecting somebody to simply give up because you think you have adequately made your argument, even though that someone's sticking to their argument implies that you have not convinced them at all.

Oh, hey. Would you look at that - it sounds like exactly what you're doing!

See, I can be persuaded if the argument is convincing enough. But your argument is not convincing at all. So don't blame your failure to make a persuasive argument on my inability to be persuaded by your poor persuasion skills.
Click to expand...

That's just me being sarcastic.

I don't want to persuade you, i just don't understand why you bring up questions of law unrelated to the killing of the cartoonists.
 
Apparently the supermarket gunman in Paris is demanding that the siege where the Kouachi brothers are pinned down is lifted, otherwise he will continue to hold hostages in Paris.
 
Touring Mars
Apparently the supermarket gunman in Paris is demanding that the siege where the Kouachi brothers are pinned down is lifted, otherwise he will continue to hold hostages in Paris.
Click to expand...

Yet another social degenerate crawls out of their hole.... sick 🤬
 

Similar threads

Dennisch
Shootings and explosions in Paris.
29 30 31
Replies
915
Views
46K
Dennisch
Dennisch
Dennisch
Machete-wielding attacker shot at the Louvre Paris.
Replies
18
Views
955
LMSCorvetteGT2
LMSCorvetteGT2
t3hgt3ftw1n
Bombing at Ataturk Airport in Istanbul
Replies
28
Views
2K
TenEightyOne
TenEightyOne
xXKingJoshXx
GTPlanet's "The Blacklist" Appreciation Thread
2 3
Replies
79
Views
13K
JR98
JR98
RCKakashi14
Takuma Gaiden II: Road to America (Pt. 2) - Page 31: LFA's Song
34 35 36
Replies
1K
Views
161K
RCKakashi14
RCKakashi14

Latest Posts

Back