Qatar has come out strongly against the recent publication of a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad on the front page of a French satirical newspaper, saying that “freedom of expression does not mean insulting others.”
The country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs made its remarks about 10 days after condemning a deadly attack on the same publication.
On Jan. 8, gunmen stormed the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris, killing 12 people – including cartoonists, the publication’s top editor and police officers.
The men were apparently seeking revenge for the publishing of caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad, among other controversial cartoons.
At the time, Qatar officials “stressed that such acts against defenseless civilians contradict with all moral principles and human values.”
In its first issue since the attack, Charlie Hebdo this week published an edition with a cover that reprised its Prophet Muhammad caricature.
The tearful cartoon is holding up an “I am Charlie” sign (a hashtag that many have embraced to support freedom of expression). Above his head, a banner declares: “All is forgiven.”
The millions of printed copies quickly sold out in France.
Muslim reaction
But many Muslims have said they are offended by the cartoon.
New Khartoon! Recruitment … #CharlieHebdo new cover .. #Paris #JeSuisCharlie #JeSuisPasCharlie #Islam #AhmedMerabet pic.twitter.com/OiuqdiOWnU
— ود البيه (@khalidalbaih) January 15, 2015
In a statement issued late Thursday night, MOFA said “that freedom of expression does not mean offending others and provoke feelings and cynicism on the beliefs and religious symbols.”
It continued:
“Such actions were shameful and would not serve the interests of any one but it would fuel the hatred, anger, and constitute a violation of human values and the principles of peaceful coexistence, tolerance, moderation and mutual respect among peoples.
The ministry called on the Western media to respect others and their beliefs and keep away from intolerance and extremism and be committed to the values and principles upon which the Western civilization were established.”
The sentiment was echoed this week by many Muslim community members and leaders, including Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, who called the cartoon an “open provocation.”
https://twitter.com/AndrewMLeber/status/555305988996481024
Debate continues
Pope Francis also weighed in, stressing that freedom of speech was important, but had its limits.
Speaking to journalists flying with him on a trip to the Philippines, the pontiff said that last week’s attacks were an “aberration” and could not be justified.
But he added, as reported by the BBC:
“If my good friend Doctor Gasparri (who organizes the Pope’s trips) speaks badly of my mother, he can expect to get punched,” he said, throwing a pretend punch at the doctor, who was standing beside him.
“You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit.”
However, the cartoonist who drew the caricature said he cried after drawing it, suggesting his intention was not to offend.
In a statement, Luz explained:
“This was not the front page the world wanted us to draw, it was our front page.
This is not the front page that the terrorists want us to draw, as there are no terrorists in it, just a man who cries: it’s Mohammed. I am sorry that we drew him again, but the Mohammed we drew is a Mohammed who is crying above all.”
Thoughts?
They have not learned their lessons and looking for even more problems.
Do you mean they should keep their mouth shut or they will be killed?
Yes ur right. Both are unacceptable
Both what?
It was the only thing they could do, they cannot give into religious bigots. Now they have gone from just thousands of copies every week, to five million. My Twitter feed is full of pictures of Mohd. Well done religious extremists, if you had just ignore them it would not have been a problem, now nearly everyone on earth has seen a cartoon of Mohd!
Oh, a lesson was learned, I would say that that is clear – just not the lesson that the killers ( and seemingly you) wanted them to learn.
and if they don’t live it they can leave their own country, how dare them!
it is not an offence in France, nor does it mock anyone’s religion – more so it shows the humility and compassion which I would assume sound-minded followers of any faith would have. So before you condemn it , think about what it says – it certainly does NOT mock Islam
He admitted it and it is nothing new. It has been done since 2011.Freedom of expression. Yeah. But not in the case of any religion. Especially here the case of our beloved prophet muhammad saw. Even god won’t like that if any one insults the prophets starting from Adam to muhammad saw
What a place the world could be. JL had it correct.
let God speak for himself….or should I guess you heard from Him?
Our God can fight his own battles, you claim to consider Jesus as a prophet then why not follow his teachings of peace, Mercy and love. if you slap my cheek i will give the other side, as opposed to an eye for an eye which is followed by most Muslim Extremist. and in this case it is death for a cartoon depiction what a poor mentality meant for the middle ages
Actually, in Islam, it is an offense to have any illustrations of the prophet Mohammed. So before you go on a rampage yelling that it doesn’t mock Islam, maybe you should look into it.
Sorry but your wrong, that is only a recent interpretation. Plenty of muslims have depicted Mohd in art.
Of course, you know more about Islam than any Muslims, thanks for clarifying our religion, we didn’t know anything before you told us about it.
Our religion? I thiught it was from god to mankind.
Our, I am part of mankind.
No problem. Any time you need a bit of advice I’m here……
I don’t claim to be an expert but if you can prove me wrong I’m happy to admit it.
….and there in lies the problem. France is not a muslim country so why should it change its great culture to accommodate your views, when Muslims seek, or seem to assume the right to impose their views and restrictions of the culture of others irrespective of location? The cartoon was not mocking Islam, but it was doing something a Muslim should not have does within their own faith – yet you can see muslims using prostitutes and drinking alcohol within Qatar !
Did you read what the founder of this so called satire paper had to say about it?
Then those who have chosen to follow Islam should obey that rule, if it is actually a rule. Such thinking doesn’t apply to most, as most aren’t bound by the precepts of Islam. There, that was easy.
Museums around the world are full of beautiful depictions of the Prophet, created by Muslims. The ban on images is a modern construct, not an ancient original command it seems. As someone who grew up surrounded by images of the baby Jesus, drawing them myself as a child, I find it difficult to understand.
it isnt? really? then did they put this guy on trial
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/4351672/French-cartoonist-Sine-on-trial-on-charges-of-anti-Semitism-over-Sarkozy-jibe.html
It does not matter the intentions of the cartoon. Were the repercussions of publishing the 2nd depiction really worth it? For example in Niger you have Muslims burning churches and people dead (why I am not sure as it is an atheist paper). Was it worth it? What did we get from the cartoon? I didn’t get anything; it didn’t provoke thought and instead just offended people, moved ignorant people to more violence and yeah…can’t think of anything positive. It is sad; I do think people should be allowed to say what they want in France but they should be mindful of what they say and do…especially when it will affect so many on a global scale -and we all already knew it would be a large scale response. Sometimes silence and listening is more powerful than proving a point.
Yes and you are right right. It is idiotic, and lack of respect. Greatness thoughts are meaningless for all Europeans! Let those who do something criminal, going in the judiciary. Caricatures in Denmark, was not a man who thought it was interesting. So this vulgar newspaper company that makes satire, was something few who bought in France. Now throw many themself on the wave, to show sympathy with the victims in Paris, for they are furious at the terrorists. Thus they lose all barriers, and found this ridiculous newspaper is fantastic, without thinking consequence of what they do !I am sorry on behalf, of all of the people, who would never have given the newspaper support in this way! Who still use their common sense, and see that terrorists are terrorists, and the faith of Muslim people should be treated with respect!
The truth.
This is moronic, the killing, raping and torture of millions of people does not compare to a depiction of Mohammed. IF you watch South Park, the west routinely mocks its own predominant religion.
http://www.haaretz.com/mobile/.premium-1.637128?v=BAB57B4EA4F764615677590CF9D33D93
the holocaust isnt really the best argument, but here you see two depictions that look pretty much the same one of the prophet and one of just some rabbi. they actually apologised for showing the rabbi accidentally. there really is a double standard of when free speech applies and when it does not
I think it was more the text, suggesting a million deaths was good, was what they apologised over
They apologised because the rabbi front cover wasn’t attributable Charlie Hebdo.
The image in the article shows what they believed to be front covers of Charlie Hebdo editions.
The one with the rabbi is a ‘Charlo Hebdo’, and was drawn by ‘the anti-Semitic illustrator Joe le Corbeau’ and not anything to do with the real Charlie Hebdo.
They were apologising for the error of printing what they thought to be a legitimate edition of Charlie Hebdo.
and this guy was put on trial because?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/4351672/French-cartoonist-Sine-on-trial-on-charges-of-anti-Semitism-over-Sarkozy-jibe.html
As far as I know he wasnt shot
dont get me wrong, killing over an insult is never justified and the people that do it should be punished severely.
however that doesn’t mean that there is no double standard to free speech, at least in some parts of Europe. seems that the defenders of free speech only show up at certain times and are silent when people like that guy are arrested.
I have seen plenty of cartoons of Jesus. Comparing the horific deaths of millions of people, still within human lifetimes, to an image of someone who lived over a millenium ago (whether a prophet or not) is absurd.
free speech is free speech… without any exceptions
Totally agree, no exceptions.
ethically, theoretically, philisophically, morally, legally and relgiously your view is not legitimately supported in working society
Ehh no, I think your comparison to the holocaust would be more accurate if the western media was full of cartoons mocking the genocide of muslims at srebrenica and zepa. Which it isn’t.
well that may make sense according to your methods, the holocaust is a well known point of offense for Jews, and illustrations of a prophet are well known points of offense for Muslims. Free speech is fine, but it’s not without accountability, if you use the word bomb in an airport, there’s a chance you’re going to miss your flight, and that accountablity is codefied in law, religious or otherwise, there seems to be a misconception about freedom of speech; i mean the Pope said it, those rules exist on playgrounds around the world
The holocaust is a well known point of offence for most of humanity, seeing as millions of people were systematically put to death. A drawing of anyone, insulting or otherwise, pales in significance.
BTW, i havent seen many murders because of, or mass protests arising from, cartoons about the holocaust, recently.
Well that’s your own interpretation of the discourse, and intrinsic sensitivity due to the holocaust is based on upbringing, exposure etc, and can’t be presumed to be offensive for all, as you said, clearly drawings aren’t insulting to you, would be proof of that;
Are you arguing, as I cannot really tell by your style of english, that the murder of millions of humans is acceptable, and comparable to a drawing?
In fact just to make my point clear, you could make a drawing of my mother conducting a sexual act with my child. Sure I would find that offensive, but never in a million years would I be able to draw any comparison to that and the murder of human beings.
If you can’t tell by the style what I’m saying, look it up, save your inference on anti-semiticism for someone with an equally poor debate and discussion technique. IF that’s too advanced, let me break it down with an analogy you can hopefully understand, in engines, they say there’s no replacement for displacement, and in your case there’s no repalcement for intelligenct thought
I know, from past discussions that you are not in favour of direct questions. So, do you think that the murder of 6 million human beings is A) Acceptable, B) Comparable to a drawing. Only require a yes or no, although I imagine that you will string together a load of large words, that when put together actually don’t mean anything.
Just to help you, I think the murder of humans is inexcusable in ALL situations, whether they have insulted my religion, mother, child, or anything I hold dear.
And we also know from past discussions, that you hijack things you don’t understand, turn them into ultimatums unrelated to the actual discussion to win a perceived victory instead of actually having a thought, go work for fox news and then learn to read what people are saying not what you think they’re saying
The words Yes or No are hard for you, aren’t they. Which is a bit strange, due to the dictionary you usually verbally excrete.
Go on, ask me a Yes/ No question, Im sure I can answer it with either a Yes or a No.
Do you understand the constucts and nuances of a critical argument?
Yes I do, I am a native English speaker. Do you understand how to answer a Yes/No question?
Was that listed as a qualification on your resume? Shda5il native English speaker
Now thats an Ad hominem.
see I do know the basics of arguement. Can you answer yes or no yet?
It’s amazing the lengths you will go to to deflect having to defend your initial argument, seemingly because you can’t. While you may know the basics of an arguement, it’s seems the basics of a spell check also elude you, I’d also go on record disagreeing with the first part of my statement.
Perhaps we could share that spell checker, based on your spelling of offense and argument above (even in the post criticising my spelling you spell argument two different ways- at least get that write if you want to use that arguement ( see the pun) I have had 8 strong belgian lagers, whats you excuse for misspelling.). But I dont really care how poor you spelling is. Just the fact the you cannot provide a straight answer is cause enough to understand what you think is acceptable.
Again to make it easy for you, I think the murder of any human being, no matter what diety they may have offended is wrong, do you?
Of course, but that’s not the argument. Now feel free to reply to the initial comment! If you have time to take off from your lager diety.
I dunno what your intitial comment was, but please rephrase it is a Yes/No format,and I will be pleased to answer it
Is it possible that it’s not absurd for it to be offensive
Yes it is offensive to muslims. i completey agree. i myself have never bought or read that magazine, I you find it offensive,you should do the same, not kill people over it
Well thankfully I haven’t killed nor have any intention too! I also wouldn’t read it but not because of offense, but because I don’t think it’s particularly intelligent. Further muslims making a big deal out of it, end up contributing to its validity in our society, a society in which we should be focusing on the well being of others. The amount of time and energy surely can be put towards outrage over human rights denied to people regardless of creed
My excuse for my spelling was satire
Acceptable, it didnt offend me, and I certainly wouldnt want you dead over it
The term is direct question fyi.
Do you understand how to answer a direct question?
Is a straw man one of them?
Do you moonlight as the bassist in a rhcp cover band?
The difference is, religion is a lifestyle choice, and by expecting those who don’t follow that lifestyle to follow its restrictions on speech you get into tricky grounds. Individual countries restricting certain types of speech based on their history and heritage is one thing, what is so dangerous is religions imposing their understanding of the world on others – it must not be allowed.
So what your missing is actually how societies work and saying all religions should be excluded as valid stakeholders in ethical and legal considerations? You end up with under-represented and marginalised segments of society, I’m sure there’s somewhere that happens that we all complain about it
I didn’t say any such thing I don’t believe. Religious beliefs are subservient to the laws of parliament or whatever the system is. The rules of various beliefs are permissible as long as they don’t contradict the ultimate law of the land. The only laws that apply to all are the laws of the land, rules such as the banning of the image of Moh’d only apply to those who choose to follow them and if they don’t contradict national laws. That is all that I said, that has nothing to do with marginalized segments of society.
As for Qatar, it makes no claims of tolerance, unlike the societies we are discussing.
Deleting most of these thread because it’s getting off topic and devolving into personal attacks.
What and what ?
There has been many movies and TV shows where the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan is portrayed as heroic and noble.
Furthermore, we are not simply talking about mocking the people who were killed by the Holocaust; rather, in many European countries it’s illegal to even merely question some facts about the Holocaust (like the number of Jews killed, or how wide spread was the use of gas chambers, etc.)
Meanwhile, it’s perfectly okay to spread lies about Muslims and Islam, and make absurd claims such as that female gentile mutilation is an Islamic practice.
This reminded me about a cnn interview that shows the extent of some people’s ignorance, more importantly those who should be well informed and who are in a position to influence, check this out: http://youtu.be/PzusSqcotDw
Yes, I’ve seen this, and I was shocked by the way the 2 CNN anchors acted toward Aslan.
It’s the people that carry out female genital mutilation that call it an Islamic practice.
Does that include the non-Muslims who practice it?
Also, by that logic, can we say that Christianity is a racist religion since some White Christians believe that the Bible has forbidden marriage between Whites and Blacks, and that the Bible also says that Whites are superior to Blacks?!
Dunno – ARE there any non-Muslims who practice NGM? I’ve never heard of any.
Christianity, like any organised religion has certainly been used by racists to shore up their racist beliefs. But there has also been widespread censure by Christians against them as well as criminal law against racism and hate crimes. Is there a fatwa against FGM? Is there a fatwa against the flogging of Raif Badawi? Why not?
My point about racist White Christians, the KKK for example, was a response to you saying that FGM is an Islamic practice becasue the Muslims who practice say so.
Feel free to look up FGM and you’ll find that indeed there are non-Muslims who practice it. Google is your friend, don’t be afraid to use it.
Ouch! that was patronising! but you’re right – Christian and animist groups also practice it.
Would I find the fatwa against Raif Badawi on Google?
Not patronizing; you said you have not heard about FGM being practiced by any non-Muslims, so I simply suggested you look it up.
As for your question about fatwas; I don’t think you understand how a fatwa work. Again, you can look it up. I do recall that the Muslim counsil of Europe, and or, the Mufti of Egypt did issue a fatwa against FGM.
However, I cannot help but see a similarity your way of thinking and of those who keep asking things like why haven’t we seen Muslims protesting things like Charlie Hebdo shooting or ISIS.
Too right. But the cartoon does lack the nuance to note the hypocrisy of Holocaust denial laws.
For the record, the Holocaust did happen. But free speech means idiots have the right to deny it and others have the right to prove it.
so what’s the criteria, how much time passed? how many people died? your rules or theirs? either it’s all allowed or not, you think it’s fine but for them it’s perceived to be just as bad or worse.
That only applies in certain countries, not the whole of the west and is wrong. Luckily in the gulf we see plenty of racist cartoons about jews and the holocaust so I guess it balances out
While I am completely against the attack, the following quotes sum up why #IamnotCharlie
“Satire is traditionally the weapon of the powerless against the powerful. When satire is aimed at the powerless, it is not only cruel — it’s vulgar.” Molly Ivins
“In a brutally unequal world, satire that mocks everyone equally ends up serving the powerful.” Saladin Ahmed
Are you saying a billion Muslims are powerless against a magazine that had a circulation of 30,000? Religious dictatorships still exist in the world, saudi and iran to name two and they have power to oppress millions of people.
The words of imams and so called Islamic scholars also oppress millions worldwide. Hardly an institution that is powerless. If unchecked, it brings misery to millions.
French Muslims are constantly facing prejudice and discrimination. It is much more difficult for them to find jobs, to get bank loans, to be promoted. They are intentionally kept at the bottom of the social ladder and differentiated from the rest of French society. Its the very thing Obama criticized Europe for only a couple of hours ago.
Again I am not justifying the murders nor am I saying they deserved it. I am just saying that I am not Charlie because the cartoons enforce the prejudice and discrimination that French Muslims already experience. I hope I was able to put those two quotes in context now.
In France they are probably discrimated against because they are not white, being muslim as well is just a coincidence.
I guess to saudi I could include, Afghanistan, aceh, boko haram in Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, oppression in certain muslim dominated States in Malaysia, Mali, Sudan…. Well that nearly covers most of them. Funny how people in those countries want to leave and head to Europe or the US but you don’t see Europeans or Americans wanting to move to those countries.
Your comments just show how ignorant and biased you are. To add to your list, you can include Israel for oppressing the people of Ghaza (and murdering them by the thousands whenever it feels like it), many African countries for oppression by Christian drug lords, you can include many South American countries for having the highest crime and murder rates in the world. You can include North Koreans who are being oppressed by their dictator. There are countless examples from all over the world. Islam does not cause any of these yet you spew your comments here everyday on how its the source of evil on this Earth. Why not include the country you’re living in now? Its a Muslim country isn’t it? Why aren’t you running off to Europe and US? I’ve already mentioned this to you before but you choose to not acknowledge it. You’re a hopeless case, keep thinking and believing in your hateful idiotic and ignorant ways.
With this blind hatred that you have for Islam I am certain now you must be gay.
I have no blind hatred for islam, just an apathetic indifference but intrigued by its indoctrination techniques.
However all though you are wrong on being gay, you certainly wouldn’t want to be gay and muslim as you will be then on the receiving end of some pretty harsh intolerance.
DEKAN23 i do not think he has blind hatred for islam, when he speaks facts you resort to name calling, that sums it up.
Agree on Israel, another country based on one religion only oppressing those of other faiths. In fact in Gaza they have created a huge concentration camp, you would think they would learn from history.
Drugs lords in Africa don’t do they criminal activity and killing in the name of Christianity, they are just Christians by accident of birth.
Islam is more than a religion, it is used as a political system and through the use of sharia law imposes on all residents in a chosen location whether muslim or not.
One more thing. I was not aware Islam is an institution? Islam is a religion, it does not oppress and bring misery. People can oppress and bring misery, like people in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. If it was Islam to blame then why can’t you say the same about all Muslim countries? Bigotry at its finest.
I think quite a few people in the West are appalled by much of what appeared in Charlie Hebdo, which is much harsher on Christianity than any other faith. If any of the several million people who bought the latest issue and bothered to read it would know, it thoroughly and profanely abuses Mother Theresa.
However, if a group of her nuns activated a cell in Paris and killed the artists (and responding police along the way), I would be outraged. Moreover, I would continue to respect the right of cartoonists in France, which is secular by law, to print such filth. I would exercise my right not to read it.
The holocaust is not a religious belief, its a fact that you can freely debate, if you have relevant facts, you are encouraged to do so, if you have the facts.. The holocaust was the murder of thousands of people. It can be proved.You can deny it no one will really care.
Its like comparing Religion to Gravity. One is a belief and one is a fact. If you want to see go to the roof and scream out “I don’t believe in gravity” then jump.
Each wrong deed provokes more wrong doing.The first catoons were wrong, the killing was wrong, the new cartoon is even more wrong. But there is a silver lining.It is good if we start fighting with pens and colours than with bullets.
Yes ,,, my frind
Two wrongs don’t make a right and a drawing never justifies murder. You cannot equate the two.
Please remove the picture of the Pope. I feel insulted.
Probably the memories of when you were a young boy in the Catholic church have come flooding back…..
Can I give u nine up votes
you know they say “years ago young boys used to grow up with dreams of entering the priesthood – now its the other way around”… think about it !
The only way that the situation will improve is for people to discuss the matter in a civilised manner. As someone who does not believe in any God, one hand I can’t understand why anyone should see any offence in a cartoon? If your faith is that strong what difference does it make? On the other hand I am liberal enough to see that to some people it is a massive issue that people like me need to understand more fully. It is only through dialogue that any kind of understanding can be reached and everyone can start to work on the real issue, which is the thousands of lives that are being taken across the globe in the name of religion.
Even AlJazeera choose not to show the Charle Hebdo front page out of respect to its viewers who “may be offended”
I guess Doha News does not care about that.
So what do you do with your offence?
so if they get offended.. they will kill someone?
Al Jazeera would face legal restrictions that others don’t, so what’s your point?
That is true, why would they want to face 7 years in jail for publishing the front page. No freedom of speech here.
IF we focus on freedom of speech of from the person offended, if that be race, religion, creed, colour, gender, lifestyle, sexuality everything becomes a matter of subjectivity. If we be objective and actually deliberate over what we are doing we can come to an understanding and tolerance. This man has drawn a cartoon of a person. As an atheist, I see no issue with this. If that person were Jesus, Buddha or whoever it is not offensive. We must practice tolerance and acceptance rather than deny people the right to expression. It also raises the question. If your God is the creator and the almighty. What does it mean to God if one man in the world draws an image. Surely God will be the judge, not his followers.
Islamic preachers, scholars or whatever they are need to come out and stop this absurdity. No where in the Koran does it say you cannot depict Mohd, in fact saying it is wrong is only a recent invention. Islamic history is full of art of Mohd, especially the Shia side of the faith. These religious bigots getting all upset now don’t even know the history of their own faith, it is just to suit their narrative that the west is waging war on Islam, whereas the truth is the west could’nt care less about Islam. Maybe that is what upsets them more.
For those in Europe who thinks freedom of expression is bad, I suggest they move to saudi, iran, Pakistan where freedom of expression is heavily curtailed and they can live happily in oppression.
Generally, your comments are the most bigoted on here, I mean that in the nicest possible way as well! “…dont even know the history of their own faith, it is just to suit their narrative that the west is waging war on Islam…” Are you speaking around yourself here? You don’t understand the history or classification of your own “faith” so to speak (the foundation of ethical and moral behaviour as interpreted through the mdoernist movement of the 18th century or so), and use any religious discussion to suit your narrative that all religions equate to ignorance! By doing so paint all non-aligned persons with the brush of ignorance, ie. the defintion of bigotry. I don’t even disagree with what you are saying in a way, the people making a big deal out of it, probably need a bit of a reality check and the end result of their behaviour is the thing ends up going viral, spreading more hate and anaimosity.
That’s your opinion and your entitled to it but I’ve always stood for freedom, be that freedom of religion or freedom from religion.
you make a valid point freedom of and freedom for
The pope’s stance is hypocritical but political. To the catholic church islam is the enemy, the infidels corrupting their true faith, however by siding with them over this issue maybe he can get special protection for his corporation as well. Nothing the church, (and islam) likes more than to stop any discussion of their true doctrine and silence any criticism.
Take the saa’na manuscripts for example, all examination of them were stopped at the imams realised they contridict standard Islamic interpretations of their faith. Same with the Catholic church persecuting Galileo for telling the truth.
Don’t let religion control the government or your lives as it always ends in misery.
Free Raif.
http://newsthump.com/2015/01/16/freedom-of-speech-about-as-important-as-freedom-to-use-condoms-insists-pope/
so u kill because of that..
Of course not, no one deserves to die because of a cartoon. You missed my point.
Wars have happened because of a slight. Maybe you miss a point there
i only kill because i want to colonise coloured peoples land, take their resources and then a few generations later say hay im from here, this is my home, i have more of a right to be here than the locals. you know good old fashioned European reasons. for those i can kill millions and never have to face justice or apologise
Yes they did that but also the Persians had a huge empire, the Islamic empire was even bigger and invaded parts of Europe and colonised. So what is the point? Well at some point we have to leave the past in the past, not forget it, but not use it as an excuse. Do the people in southern Spain blame the muslim occupation for hundreds of years on their current economic woes? Of course not.
Muslims got kicked out of Spain in the 1400’s. The french left algeria in the 1960’s. Big difference
If anyone wants to check out art with Mohd in, made by Muslims in the Islamic empire here you go. Some of it is very good. Don’t let the religious bigots control your anger.
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/
Very educational and you have to wonder why the various media outlets haven’t pointed out this contradiction through the whole Charlie Hedbo debate. Sloppy journalism?
Some have but screaming muslims, face contorted in rage seems to be their preffered angle.
Muslim rage boy is a front cover is more likely to sell than academics discussing the history of Moh’d images in the Ottoman Empire.
Sad but true.
I don’t know, I find him pretty amusing. I wonder if he knows that he has become a parody of himself? Not something that everyone can say.
They have pointed it out, I have seen this in a number of news magazines. Perhaps pointing out how mistaken some Muslims are about their own belief system and history is a problem?
Haha, don’t let facts get in the way of what you believe! If we took that attitude then most of us would still think the earth is flat and the universe revolves around the earth.
Can’t reply right now, it is time for my next mercury treatment.
Ha! Tapped on your link without my VPN. Got the pink background and cartoon of the Arab that looks like he stuck his toe in an electrical receptacle….. Figures.
Link is now blocked…say no more.
Authorities obviously scared of history.
very beautiful
Free Raef Badaoui
It is a shame that a real crime such as the torture and imprisonment of Raif is largely ignored over a few cartoons.
and considering that democratic country that is Saudi condemned the Paris Attack….however today the flogging was suspended. I really hope they will not continue this unhuman behaviour
WANTED Muslim dead or alive!
I saw that t-shirt. Found it distasteful, so didn’t buy. I guess that is the system as it should be.
That would make sense if the car manual said drive your car into people, whereas the Koran contains several passages related to killing your enemies.
This is an interesting read: http://specc.ie/1ASaNhw.
Mocking Islam and Muslims is an old tradition of France. This stamp is of Muslims beheaded in Morocco by the French and used as French Stamp. 1922
If that is true then that is shocking. In fact France’s record in Algeria and Morocco was disgusting.
And they never took responsibility for it. Yet now they want the entire muslim world to take responsibility for the actions of terrorists.
Deleting because this is a very disturbing graphic image and we don’t publish such photos of dead people on this forum.
Fair enough.
All the comments on this article are too long and I can’t read that much words
I know!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Brain cells working…..it is too much
Yes finally someone understands me!
There is a difference between freedom of speech and inciteful speech. Poking the hornets nest with language and images meant to hurt a group is inciteful, provoking speech. Just printing opinions, even in cartoons is different than the recent images in the magazine, which I also find disturbing. As a Westerner and Christian, I apologize for the purposeful, distasteful images of Mohammed meant to provoke. I hope that you are equally outraged by the disgusting cartoon with Mary and Jesus. I agree with Pope, there is a line, it’s been crossed. I heard that Air France is putting this magazine on their airline, which worries me from a safety and security standpoint.
There are no lines drawn, lines equal censorship. Who will draw such lines? Those who fear critique, fear words and ideas. If you are unable to deal with comment, then your standpoint is weak.
Cartoons illicit a response. That is the purpose. What is truly offensive is the public flogging week after week in the name of a faith of a man who desires freedom of expression. Now that would be worth a statement in the press by leaders and spokesmen of said faith.
Well said.
Still no condemnation, the punishment still stands, ‘in the name of God’ delayed a week because the victim is deemed unfit. It’s appalling, it’s enough to make people question the foundations of such justice.
Yes, well said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/opinion/thomas-friedman-we-need-another-giant-protest.html?_r=0
Don’t confuse all Christians as beeing Catholics
Thats right, they are not but they should be. Its just a phase they are going through. 🙂 See, we can mock one another.
ill give you ine small example of the well known western hypocrisy .. let’s say i belive only 400 – 600 thousand jew were killed during world war 2 .. would i be able to publish that in a free newspaper in where in the west ?? the answer is simply no . end of discussion
Yes you can but what you cannot dispute is the fact that it took place. That is why the law is in place. It is not to protect the Jews but to combat neo-nazism.
Yes you could. In Scandinavia, the UK, Eastern european countries. No in Germany, Austria and France. Which is wrong. If you want to deny it, that is your right. Doesn’t mena your right, but you shoudl be able to say it.
the number of people killed during WWII is not a matter of “believing” – If you felt that the historical record was incorrect then you would need to explain how and argue your point with new evidence. It’s got nothing to do with believing.
The answer is yes. But no one would really care.
But you are mistaking beliefs with facts. We can literally count the dead body’s and missing people in the holocaust v the belief of religion, which has some fantastic stories, can you really prove Mohammed (PBUH) was flown to heaven on a winged horse? one has evidence, one is a belief. science and facts are encouraged to be questioned, that’s what scientist and historians do.
What we see here in religion is any questions or descent will be punished with tremendous violence.
Disappointed by the Pope’s remarks. Does this mean that violence and murder are justifiable? Which gospel is he preaching from?
Matthew 5:38-40New International Version (NIV)
Eye for Eye
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.”
I’m sorry but Pope Francis is not saying that its justified. he also believes that “last week’s attacks were an “aberration” and could not be justified” during his talks with journalist in his trip to the Philippines.
What he was truly pointing out was that freedom of speech doesn’t mean people can demean your beliefs.
There’s no need to be sorry. The remark is open to interpretation and perhaps he needs a consistent message and avoid off the cuff remarks. What he called the attack is irrelevant if the following week he thinks it’s ok to punch someone for ‘insulting my mother’.
http://www.newstatesman.com/mehdi-hasan/2015/01/muslim-i-m-fed-hypocrisy-free-speech-fundamentalists
People that add “but” at the end of a sentence related to these atrocities have not and will never understand anything. That “but” makes people accomplices to a horrid crime. It’s like saying: “Sure there have been issues in the church with priests raping kids, BUT look at all the charity and good it’s done”. Like one act should somehow absolve the others. Assume culpability for your actions like the employees at CH did. If everyone would do that there would be less need of stating that you’re “offended” or that something is “politically incorrect”.
There is one this missing in this debate. Muslims complain that a picture of Mohd is offensive and should not be shown but what if I want to see cartoons of Mohd. To have them banned denies me my right to view them. Why should my rights be denied by a minority who also have the option not to view the cartoons?
you seem to be more interested in stirring the pot. Habits never change.
But it’s a good point. Why should one section of society dictate what is acceptable to another?
Polygamy is legal in islam but muslims married to more than one women are not arrested the moment they arrive in Europe where it is illegal. Many in Europe find this arrangement offensive. In some muslims countries old men marry children, many people around the world find that deeply offensive but you don’t see the, killing those men or those that support child brides.
I struggle with the argument on free speech at any cost. I feel uneasy with Charlie Hebro’s mantra that you have the right to insult or lampoon anyone you want. The western world has core values of respect and tolerance that were established when Christianity was a religion ingrained in society and not simply a way of life as it is today, and CH’s efforts seem to overstep the mark. All CH have done is create more radicals, and it’s no use saying that Islam should be more tolerant and accepting of western values but the fact is that the two cultures do not have the same values, and what tolerance and respect exists is being further eroded as the two cultures become more polarised.
Why? so you are saying i have to keep quiet even if i disagree. That in itself is violence. Many people totally disagree with religion, which is there religion i guess?. Me as a agnostic, does not care if religious people do what ever as long as it not affecting my life, I enjoy going to religious festivals from many religions because I want to. The moment I have to bow to someone because of their belief I am being forced, that’s not cool.
The moment I have to bow for fear of being killed, its gotten out of hand.
Religion
is an idea, and, as an idea, it should be eligible for criticism,
discussion, and yes, mockery. The only reason so many believers demand
special exceptions be made for religious ideas is because they know full
well that their ideas don’t hold up well under scrutiny.” -Amanda
Marcotte
Freedom of speech remains absolute.
So its okay to say to people that they are “fat”, “ugly” or that they
look like “monkeys”, “dogs” or “pigs” etc. Because Freedom of Speech
remains absolute, right?
Why can I not offend people. I have a right to not believe and say so. I don’t have to like people or ideas even if they are leaders or religious icons. If you take offence, well done, you don’t have to like me or my ideas, but we can still live together as neighbors. The violence is the issue here.
Why has “offence” been place above murder. Murder is top of the bad things to do list, offending would be down the bottom some where below cutting in line.
Freedom of expression is not a violent act but to kill innoncence people and revenge that is ever worse act against freedom to live and thus, commited unrighteous violating the the constitutional law, human law, law of the land and and the Law of God as well. Gentlemen, you have no right to cut the life of anyone, you cannot restore the life of anyone that you killed. Do not tell the world that you are offended. Rather you should realize that it was serve as an open eye to know more and make your mind to be broaden. Try to learn for every aspect and angle of freedom that does not limit your perverted and crooked mind. To killed is not the way to save your face from being offended and absolutely cannot solve the issues. God more offended that you because many lives of innocent are killed without cause.
I agree with Qatar’s stance completely. The mocking of others faiths, in my opinion, really does nothing positive.
I don’t see any difference between those demonstrating around the world, murdering bystanders, burning churches, all in the name of God, and murdering IS Thugs who hack heads off ‘in the name of God’. No difference. Anyone who can murder in the name of God is deluded, and evil, or seriously badly led
This brings to mind a quote (purportedly) by Voltaire that my wife reminded me of: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
Freedom of Expression: I have the freedom to say that your wife has a face like a Pug chewing a wasp. I don’t, though, because I’m polite and don’t want to offend.
Just because you CAN do something, doesn’t mean you SHOULD. And that applies to cartoonist and publishers, too.
(Apologies to anyone whose wife has a face like a Pug chewing a wasp. Not because I’ve offended you, just because she’s your wife, man…. )
It’s amazing how people just run their mouth. How brainwashed they will follow what the media instructs them to do – cry free speech when it comes to bashing muslims !
It amazing that this is considered ‘free speech’; we need to call it what it is: an insult to at least 1,6 bilion muslims. Free speech does not mean to insult, free speech is there to make all subjects an object of discussion. Discussion need to take place in a respectful way; and I don’t know anyone who wouldn’t want to discuss all historic facts and figures about the prophet (pbuh). The problem is these double standards where if you ‘negate’ the genocide of the jews during WWII, in most European countries you will actually get jailed and fined… ‘for speaking your mind in a respectful way’ – and on the other hand, when it comes to 1,6 bilion people, all goes, the more insulting, the more media time it gets.
We need to stop pretending that insulting is equal to free speech. Insulting is exactly that, insulting, and aiming at provoking a reaction and / or polarising or defaming a person or group of people. The discussion should be around the fact if the deeply rooted ‘white’ supremacy that is alive and well in Europe and most of the western world has a right to exist in a world that claims to be free and consider all men ‘equal’. (I guess they left out the part that reads: but some more equal than others)