Je suis Charlie

I started this thread to honor the pointless deaths of the cartoonists and satirists at Charlie Hebdo, and all who support freedom of speech everywhere in the world.

I thank all of them for their courage! They make the world a better place.

It could have been us

I completely agree that this is the right place for this thread.

All us writers here can all say "This could have been us..." We've all had feedback from "offended" readers. Granted, few of us get such because we actively criticized some group, organization, theology or political views. I don't write erotica with the awareness that I'm going to offend powerful or dangerous people, and so I won't claim the courage of journalists and satirists around the world who do.

Yet the fact that we write erotica is often held by some as just as much an an assault on their values, morals, politics and faith as any pointed satire. So, in the end, though we may not write our erotic to make a particular point about faith or politics or such...this sort of thing could happen to us.

Je Sulis Charlie. Any who put out what they write for the public to read are.

The names of the Charlie Hebdo victims will eventually be added to the memorial in Bayeux France to those journalists who have died for a free press.

http://archives.prixbayeux.org/index.php?id=46&L=1



http://www.lonelyplanet.com/france/...teries-memorials-tombs/memorial-des-reporters

I would rather see the names of the cartoonists who died on three other headstones, not their own.

May be an unpopular viewpoint... The murders at Charlie Hebdo are repellent and inexcusable, and certainly they were an attack on freedom of expression. But I'm uncomfortable with portraying CH as a champion of that freedom. Everybody supports free expression when it comes to their own opinions, but as not-actually-Voltaire said, it's about whether you extend that freedom to the people you disagree with.

CH were certainly happy to speak their minds where Muslims were concerned; if you look through their covers you'll see a lot of stereotypical cartoon Arab Muslim pieces.

But when France banned freedom of expression for women who chose to wear a veil, back in 2010? CH's response was 'Yes to wearing the burqa... on the inside.' As the cartoon makes clear: shove the burqa up your ass. Hard to see that as championing free expression.

So I prefer to leave this one at "murder is wrong" without extending as far as "je suis Charlie".

I agree. I think that freedom of expression goes with a responsibility toward others. It isn't totally unfettered. I don't think that murder is anything close to a legitimate response to in-your-face disrespect, but I won't martyr someone for blatantly asking for it with total disregard for anything/anyone but what they can get away with (or not).

CH is not the ACLU, indeed; but...

I agree that many - France in particular - have not had the most stellar association with support of freedom of expression, and I don't equate CH with the ACLU. In fact, I am not aware - my ignorance, possibly - of any organization quite like the ACLU, which DOES protect all manner of freedom of expression, even when it is the minority expression and repugnant to the majority.

Nevertheless, I stand by my support of the individuals killed, if not the institution.

Bramblethorn said:

May be an unpopular viewpoint... The murders at Charlie Hebdo are repellent and inexcusable, and certainly they were an attack on freedom of expression. But I'm uncomfortable with portraying CH as a champion of that freedom. Everybody supports free expression when it comes to their own opinions, but as not-actually-Voltaire said, it's about whether you extend that freedom to the people you disagree with.

CH were certainly happy to speak their minds where Muslims were concerned; if you look through their covers you'll see a lot of stereotypical cartoon Arab Muslim pieces.

But when France banned freedom of expression for women who chose to wear a veil, back in 2010? CH's response was 'Yes to wearing the burqa... on the inside.' As the cartoon makes clear: shove the burqa up your ass. Hard to see that as championing free expression.

So I prefer to leave this one at "murder is wrong" without extending as far as "je suis Charlie".

Click to expand...

legerdemer said:

I agree that many - France in particular - have not had the most stellar association with support of freedom of expression, and I don't equate CH with the ACLU. In fact, I am not aware - my ignorance, possibly - of any organization quite like the ACLU, which DOES protect all manner of freedom of expression, even when it is the minority expression and repugnant to the majority.

Nevertheless, I stand by my support of the individuals killed, if not the institution.

Click to expand...

I support them against murderers, just don't want to blur that into endorsing their own actions.

But one who should definitely be remembered as a martyr for free speech - the French Muslim police officer who was shot in the head for defending CH's right to ridicule his religion and culture.

legerdemer said:

I started this thread to honor the pointless deaths of the cartoonists and satirists at Charlie Hebdo, and all who support freedom of speech everywhere in the world.

I thank all of them for their courage! They make the world a better place.

Click to expand...

I wonder if M le President will ask for the restoration of the Guillotine. Or maybe a simpler, cheaper, 'shoot to kill' order to the Police.

It's interesting to see the placards. According to a very educated pal of mine, "Je suis Charlie" is a pun or play on words.
It should translate to "I follow Charlie", not "I am Charlie" (I'm sorry but my friend did not give me the right spelling as the two words are Very Very similar).

Handley_Page said:

I wonder if M le President will ask for the restoration of the Guillotine. Or maybe a simpler, cheaper, 'shoot to kill' order to the Police.

It's interesting to see the placards. According to a very educated pal of mine, "Je suis Charlie" is a pun or play on words.
It should translate to "I follow Charlie", not "I am Charlie" (I'm sorry but my friend did not give me the right spelling as the two words are Very Very similar).

Click to expand...

What is written is "Je Suis Charlie" - "I AM Charlie" NOT "Je Suivre Charlie" - which would mean "I follow Charlie".

It is like the T-shirt messages "I am Spartacus" or "I am Braveheart", claiming to be the one sought to be killed by their enemies.

Bramblethorn said:

CH were certainly happy to speak their minds where Muslims were concerned; if you look through their covers you'll see a lot of stereotypical cartoon Arab Muslim pieces..

Click to expand...

Also just about every other religion. It may not seem like they were equal opportunity that way, but they were. They were anti-religion, not anti-Arabs, sympathizing, as Ogg's posted cover shows, with those Arabs gunned down by extremists.

If we're being fair, we need to be fair. They shouldn't be characterized as heroic martyrs, but neither should they be viewed as racist villains.

Charlie Hebdo cartoons criticised the Pope, Roman Catholics and the French establishment far more than anything against Islamic subjects.

But in the eyes of the fanatics who claim to be Muslim, criticising the Prophet and Islam is unacceptable and deserves the death penalty.

The Pope, Roman Catholics and the French establishment just shrugged off Charlie Hebdo's satires, even when that satire had truth in its core.

Charlie Hebdo criticised the English and Brits. We didn't care. Most of us can't read French, and those that can, don't read Charlie Hebdo (or didn't. We will now.), and think we can repay anything bad the French say about us with an overload of abuse about the French. The French and the British have been abusing each other (when not actually at war with each other) for centuries.

Neither of us have yet recovered from the shock of the pre-WW1 Entente Cordiale. The French and English as Allies? Sacré Bleu! Bloody Hell! It can't be true!

oggbashan said:

The Pope, Roman Catholics and the French establishment just shrugged off Charlie Hebdo's satires, even when that satire had truth in its core.

Click to expand...

Now this is part of what bothers me about this whole issue. I can't just decide that how The Pope, Roman Catholics, and the French establishment respond to the poking of their values should be assumed to be what the Muslims should be expected to put up with as well just because it's a Western value. The cartoonists knew the values weren't the same. And they poked the value system anyway--not just at their own peril but for the French policemen who were killed and any other innocent bystanders that got in the way.

I guess the concept of "if it's good enough for the Pope, it's good enough for the Muslims" just doesn't cut it as very intelligent or sensitive to other cultures in my world view.

sr71plt said:

Now this is part of what bothers me about this whole issue. I can't just decide that how The Pope, Roman Catholics, and the French establishment respond to the poking of their values should be assumed to be what the Muslims should be expected to put up with as well just because it's a Western value. The cartoonists knew the values weren't the same. And they poked the value system anyway--not just at their own peril but for the French policemen who were killed and any other innocent bystanders that got in the way.

I guess the concept of "if it's good enough for the Pope, it's good enough for the Muslims" just doesn't cut it as very intelligent or sensitive to other cultures in my world view.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's the point Ogg was making. I think he pointed out that CH did not back down from taking on the predominant majority religion/culture of France and hoisting them up a petard, so why should Islam deserve any more special treatment. The point overall is freedom of expression and freedom of religion. It's why hate speech is protected under the constitution under US law. France's constitution differs, but it does offer some of the same protections.

sr71plt said:

Now this is part of what bothers me about this whole issue. I can't just decide that how The Pope, Roman Catholics, and the French establishment respond to the poking of their values should be assumed to be what the Muslims should be expected to put up with as well just because it's a Western value. The cartoonists knew the values weren't the same. And they poked the value system anyway--not just at their own peril but for the French policemen who were killed and any other innocent bystanders that got in the way.

I guess the concept of "if it's good enough for the Pope, it's good enough for the Muslims" just doesn't cut it as very intelligent or sensitive to other cultures in my world view.

Click to expand...

I think you may have over-looked an important point here, Pilot.
The Muslims are in the West and have chosen to ignore Western Values. The extremists seem to imagine that their particular view is absolutely and exclusively right and therefore their chosen country of residence is wrong.
What they don't seem to realise is that they have the choice; take it or leave it.

legerdemer said:

I don't think that's the point Ogg was making.
I think he pointed out that CH did not back down from taking on the predominant majority religion/culture of France and hoisting them up a petard, so why should Islam deserve any more special treatment. The point overall is freedom of expression and freedom of religion. It's why hate speech is protected under the constitution under US law. France's constitution differs, but it does offer some of the same protections.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Why should the Islamic fanatic get a free pass ?

Personally, I'll be happier when the Arab world permits a large Christian Cathedral and freely-available services.

sr71plt said:

Now this is part of what bothers me about this whole issue. I can't just decide that how The Pope, Roman Catholics, and the French establishment respond to the poking of their values should be assumed to be what the Muslims should be expected to put up with as well just because it's a Western value. The cartoonists knew the values weren't the same. And they poked the value system anyway--not just at their own peril but for the French policemen who were killed and any other innocent bystanders that got in the way.

I guess the concept of "if it's good enough for the Pope, it's good enough for the Muslims" just doesn't cut it as very intelligent or sensitive to other cultures in my world view.

Click to expand...

Charlie Hebdo was not subtle. It was/is crude, offensive and usually nasty - but that has been a feature of French cartoon satire for generations.

What Charlie Hebdo was doing, apart from angering even moderate Muslims, was highlighting the lack of integration of Muslims into France. It is far more difficult for someone with a Muslim name to get employment or any help from France's institutions. Muslims, particularly Algerians, have been treated badly by France.

Unlike the UK where discrimination by race, colour or religion is illegal, discrimination against Muslims and Algerians is widespread in France. That has led to whole communities that might have had money thrown at their schools but the students know they are unlikely ever to get a decent job, or be treated fairly. Muslims in France can be, and many are, treated as badly as US blacks in the Southern US states used to be, and the French establishment has turned a blind eye for decades.

That doesn't excuse terrorism but it has provided a fertile breeding ground for jihadi recruiters. France has nearly twice as many of its citizens fighting in Iraq and Syria than from the UK.

An educated Muslim in the UK knows that he/she can be whatever he/she wants to be. Combining progression in a career with their own religion and community's practices might be an irritation or even an obstacle but the individual can choose how far to compromise the differing expectations.

A French Muslim, particularly from the banlieus, is unlikely to have the opportunity to choose between career and religion.

Puts me in mind of this:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgASBVMyVFI

I'd never heard of Charlie Hebdo before this. I have now and I've seen the covers of every magazine for the last year. Far from suppressing Charlie Hebdo the murderers made made it famous. I am amazed that anyone on here excuses this act in anyway. Charlie Hebdo mocked everyone. If you had a high profile they mocked you and usually it was funny.

Insulting anyone, living or dead never excuses murder. If the press in other countries had any guts they would be publishing Charlie Hebdo cartoons for the next three months to show that free speech cannot be cowed by such acts.

Now before we go out demanding blood of Muslim's we should also think about Islam. It is a relatively new religion, approximately 1500 years old. What were Christian holy men doing when their religion was 1500 years old? They were sending out soldiers to kill and enslave people who didn't believe in their god. The big difference is that now the weapons are more powerful

Correct me it I'm wrong. However, in the Islamic religion, nothing happens except by the will of Allah. Thus, Allah was willing to let Charlie Hedbro operate. This who murdered the staffers were opposing the will of Allah. To oppose the will of Allah is a very serous crime, under Sharia.

legerdemer said:

I started this thread to honor the pointless deaths of the cartoonists and satirists at Charlie Hebdo, and all who support freedom of speech everywhere in the world.

I thank all of them for their courage! They make the world a better place.

Click to expand...

The deaths were pointless because it was a terrorist attack with little rhyme or reason.

Few have commented that the vast majority of French Moslems find this atrocity awful and empathize with the views of the majority.

This is a terrorist attack by idiots, not another 9/11

sr71plt said:

Now this is part of what bothers me about this whole issue. I can't just decide that how The Pope, Roman Catholics, and the French establishment respond to the poking of their values should be assumed to be what the Muslims should be expected to put up with as well just because it's a Western value. The cartoonists knew the values weren't the same. And they poked the value system anyway--not just at their own peril but for the French policemen who were killed and any other innocent bystanders that got in the way.

I guess the concept of "if it's good enough for the Pope, it's good enough for the Muslims" just doesn't cut it as very intelligent or sensitive to other cultures in my world view.

Click to expand...

I rarely agree with you but this time I think you have it nailed.

As long as decent civilized countries try to give Islam respect and rights they will keep trying to destroy these cities from within. the only real solution after years of trying to make them equal is to realize they are uncivilized mental midgets who know nothing but war. end it Ban all immigration from Islamic countries. say Sorry to the few decent people but the Bad far far out weigh the good for the safety of Our own people which should be placed above the rights of a non citizen or a recently added citizen ban it and boot them and their religion out of every other country then you have more power to bomb the hell out of their country and no need to enter to rebuild it! let them burn let them worry about their injured deceased and rebuilding!.

I used to be fine with Immigration from any country, The issue is we have Immigration laws my government is skirting to allow this scum into the country!
each person is required to be fluent or at least passable in one of our two languages and be able to support themselves for 1 year $10,000 in pocket or bank! most have $0 speak 0 languages here and sit on Welfare use the free healthcare dental etc and treat the country like garbage. personally as a tax payer I am damn tired of it. Sikhs are a much better group, hard working great families willing to work with others when there is a problem!

What bothers me at the moment is the reluctance of the Western Media to reproduce Charlie Hebdo's cartoons. They are widely available on the internet but not in printed newspapers.

If we are saying 'We don't agree with some of Charlie Hebdo's satire but they are entitled to produce it because we value freedom of speech' then we should reprint the cartoons everywhere.

If that offends Muslims, they need to grow a thicker skin. The prohibition of images of Mohammed, the inability to criticise Allah and Mohammed are relatively modern features of Islam. So are the extreme modesty dress requirements for women, and their second-citizen status. Some of those things are NOTHING to do with Islam, and everything to do with patriarchal social values of particular Middle Eastern tribes.

The values of medieval El Andalus (Andalusia in Spain) under Muslim rule were far more integrated than anywhere else in Europe then and possibly even in many countries now. Christians and Jews could practise their religion freely and could rise to significant positions in the state.

Islam has changed. It has been influenced by too many religious leaders who have interpreted the Koran and the Hadiths only one way, and have refused to accept that past interpretations could have been flawed or wrong.

oggbashan said:

W
If that offends Muslims, they need to grow a thicker skin.

Click to expand...

And this is what offends me. Assuming Western value dominance, which is jingoism and ugly Westerner at its worst.

sr71plt said:

And this is what offends me. Assuming Western value dominance, which is jingoism and ugly Westerner at its worst.

Click to expand...

That is your view. If Muslims want to live in a Western country they have to abide by its laws at least, and preferably by its values, not act as a fifth column trying to destroy the country they live in.

If Westerners go to Muslim countries, they are expected to follow the laws and customs of that country.

What is wrong with expecting Muslims in the West to respect Western Values?

In the UK at least, Muslims can build mosques, can worship their own way, and are not oppressed for doing so. Neither are Sikhs, Hindus, Buddists, various Christian denominations.

In many Muslim countries Christians are not allowed to build churches, display a Bible and certainly not worship in public. Why not?