French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo courts more controversy with new cartoon on Islam

[Wave your flag]

French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo published Wednesday a provocative front-page cartoon about Islam and the recent terror attacks in Spain, leading to criticism that it risked fanning Islamophobia.

The latest edition of the magazine, which was targeted by Islamist gunmen in 2015, shows two people lying in a pool of blood having been run over by a van next to the words "Islam, eternal religion of peace."

A dozen extremists of Moroccan origin are believed to have plotted last week's attacks in Barcelona and Cambrils, where 15 people were killed and over 100 injured after a van and car were driven into crowds.

Critics of Charlie Hebdo saw its front-page as tarring an entire religion, practised by around 1.5 billion people worldwide, by implying it was inherently violent.

As the cartoon became one of the top trending topics on Twitter in France, prominent Socialist MP and former minister Stephane Le Foll called it "extremely dangerous".

"When you're a journalist you need to exercise restraint because making these associations can be used by other people," he said.

Charlie Hebdo editor Laurent "Riss" Sourisseau explained the choice in an editorial, saying that experts and policy-makers were avoiding hard questions out of concern for moderate law-abiding Muslims.

"The debates and questions about the role of religion, and in particular the role of Islam, in these attacks have completely disappeared," he wrote.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....rtoon-controversy-islam-barcelona-cambrils-at

 

[Third_Umpire]

now, how many cartoonists will die for this....?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Attention seeking magazine of low class. People should ignore this rubbish.

 

[s28]

They court controversy to deflect from fact their great white hope the neoliberal shill Macron is proving a disaster

 

[Major]

You know whats funny. Now instead of proving them wrong, some ******* will target them and that would actually justify the cartoon

 

[Black Zero]

These cartoons are not supposed to be funny...
How many non-muslims actually believe in the slogan that Islam is a religion of peace...i'd say...0.00000000000001%.

 

[Slog]

Attention seeking magazine of low class. People should ignore this rubbish.

then dont. Best way would be to not even respond to it here

 

[Robert]

Just because you have the right to free speech does not mean that you should use it irresponsibly. The example I always use is shouting 'fire' in a crowded cinema when there is no fire.

 

[GBK_Fan]

Just because you have the right to free speech does not mean that you should use it irresponsibly. The example I always use is shouting 'fire' in a crowded cinema when there is no fire.

Terror attacks take place in the name of religion. How is it offensive to make a cartoon on it?

 

[Robert]

Terror attacks take place in the name of religion. How is it offensive to make a cartoon on it?

Because of the generalisation, which adds to Islamophobia.

 

[ExpressPacer]

Jew's have been facing discrimination their entire lives. Heck, to this day there are so many jokes about Jews thrown out so casually, in cinema, TV, real life or even cartoons. But you don't see them going crazy about it. As Muslims, we need to relax and quite frankly - man up.

The world isn't Utopia. People will ridicule you, your faith, your people, your beliefs and your religion. You've just got to accept it and move on. That doesn't mean you start attacking them because that's what they want with this, for you to prove them right. If your feelings get hurt and you're too sensitive then the internet, the news, Muslim minority countries and basically the world isn't for you. Stay in your shell

 

[ToeCrusher2]

Because of the generalisation, which adds to Islamophobia.

This is the reason liberals can never make a tough decision, they are always worried about sentiments or hurting feelings or taking the moral high ground. Get back to the real world, one shouldn't back away from pointing out the problem even if it is falsely generalzing a group or hurting their sentiments. Problems are solved by doers and not by moral fools who won't take any action due to the ethical dilemma involved

 

[CricketCartoons]

Just deprive such publications of the oxygen of attention, but instead people will be sharing and reacting to it.

 

[JaDed]

This is the reason liberals can never make a tough decision, they are always worried about sentiments or hurting feelings or taking the moral high ground. Get back to the real world, one shouldn't back away from pointing out the problem even if it is falsely generalzing a group or hurting their sentiments. Problems are solved by doers and not by moral fools who won't take any action due to the ethical dilemma involved

Well said, reminds me of one of the episodes in Good wife where the lawyers play the liberal judge reminding him constantly that his liberal bias cannot meddle with his judgements and he falls into the trap.

 

[Asim_khan]

This is the reason liberals can never make a tough decision, they are always worried about sentiments or hurting feelings or taking the moral high ground. Get back to the real world, one shouldn't back away from pointing out the problem even if it is falsely generalzing a group or hurting their sentiments. Problems are solved by doers and not by moral fools who won't take any action due to the ethical dilemma involved

Like the sentiments expressed by...

1) German tabloids in the 30's
2) Hutu radio DJ's in the 90's in Rwanada
3) Hindutva media currently
4) Serbian nationalist media in the late 80's/early 90's



There's a reason why liberals think twice before supporting this kind of journalism, cos it always leads to something much worse.

Now I don't mind Charlie Hebdo making whatever generalisations they want, I think the French African and Arab community is as demonised as it's ever gonna be, and a few times the French cops have decided to take advantage of the youth from these communities, they've had La Haine like riots on their hands and the cheese eating, wine drinking, garlic necklace wearing, red beret adorning, mime dancing surrender monkeys have had flashbacks of the world wars and the Viet Minh and thrown in the towel. I told you, I'm a huge fan of sweeping generalisations, don't even get me started on the lack of hygiene or hairy armpits on the femme.

However what I do have a problem with is when an Arab kid is arrested for doing what the Charlie editors themselves were doing, that does not sit right with me, that's when western hypocrisy bares it's ugly face, and that is a problem... https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/france-begins-jailing-people-ironic-comments

When Charlie Artist Sine is fired for a cartoon about a minority group whilst similar ones about Muslims seem fair game, that's a problem too http://anonhq.com/charlie-hebdo-fired-anti-semitic-cartoonist-ridiculing-judaism-2009/

And I hope the Indians posting in this thread, who are such huge fans of such art, are equally as supportive of the work of Maqbool Fida Husain. He is a proud Indian after all.

 

[JaDed]

Like the sentiments expressed by...

1) German tabloids in the 30's
2) Hutu radio DJ's in the 90's in Rwanada
3) Hindutva media currently
4) Serbian nationalist media in the late 80's/early 90's



There's a reason why liberals think twice before supporting this kind of journalism, cos it always leads to something much worse.

Now I don't mind Charlie Hebdo making whatever generalisations they want, I think the French African and Arab community is as demonised as it's ever gonna be, and a few times the French cops have decided to take advantage of the youth from these communities, they've had La Haine like riots on their hands and the cheese eating, wine drinking, garlic necklace wearing, red beret adorning, mime dancing surrender monkeys have had flashbacks of the world wars and the Viet Minh and thrown in the towel. I told you, I'm a huge fan of sweeping generalisations, don't even get me started on the lack of hygiene or hairy armpits on the femme.

However what I do have a problem with is when an Arab kid is arrested for doing what the Charlie editors themselves were doing, that does not sit right with me, that's when western hypocrisy bares it's ugly face, and that is a problem... https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/france-begins-jailing-people-ironic-comments

When Charlie Artist Sine is fired for a cartoon about a minority group whilst similar ones about Muslims seem fair game, that's a problem too http://anonhq.com/charlie-hebdo-fired-anti-semitic-cartoonist-ridiculing-judaism-2009/

And I hope the Indians posting in this thread, who are such huge fans of such art, are equally as supportive of the work of Maqbool Fida Husain. He is a proud Indian after all.

So u r ok with the generalizations but not arrests,u r ok to take side of the Arab Immigrants when rioting but not ok when their force makes biased arrests?

Also your assumption is liberal media doesn't take a stand,they always do esp against the majority religion or ethnicity of their country,but they always think twice before doing it against the religion or ethnicity of minorities,that is hypocrisy as well.

An atheist is only an atheist when he speaks against all religions and bookish creations of God,not just his own.

 

[ToeCrusher2]

Like the sentiments expressed by...

1) German tabloids in the 30's
2) Hutu radio DJ's in the 90's in Rwanada
3) Hindutva media currently
4) Serbian nationalist media in the late 80's/early 90's



There's a reason why liberals think twice before supporting this kind of journalism, cos it always leads to something much worse.

Now I don't mind Charlie Hebdo making whatever generalisations they want, I think the French African and Arab community is as demonised as it's ever gonna be, and a few times the French cops have decided to take advantage of the youth from these communities, they've had La Haine like riots on their hands and the cheese eating, wine drinking, garlic necklace wearing, red beret adorning, mime dancing surrender monkeys have had flashbacks of the world wars and the Viet Minh and thrown in the towel. I told you, I'm a huge fan of sweeping generalisations, don't even get me started on the lack of hygiene or hairy armpits on the femme.

However what I do have a problem with is when an Arab kid is arrested for doing what the Charlie editors themselves were doing, that does not sit right with me, that's when western hypocrisy bares it's ugly face, and that is a problem... https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/france-begins-jailing-people-ironic-comments

When Charlie Artist Sine is fired for a cartoon about a minority group whilst similar ones about Muslims seem fair game, that's a problem too http://anonhq.com/charlie-hebdo-fired-anti-semitic-cartoonist-ridiculing-judaism-2009/

And I hope the Indians posting in this thread, who are such huge fans of such art, are equally as supportive of the work of Maqbool Fida Husain. He is a proud Indian after all.

First of all LOL at bringing hindutva media, what has hindutva ever done in history, it is hilarious to see you group hindutva with those other examples.

Secondly, German tabloids didn't create world wars, the underlying political and economic conditions created the world wars. This is what I was talking about before, the liberals are escapists, they are always looking for reasons to not take action. Propaganda is just a small tool but never the cause.

Thirdly, I am not blindly in favor of free speech, hate speech should be stopped and propaganda wars do exist and do cause damage ( but libtards always like to overplay its importance, propaganda won't work without the underlying conditions). In this case however, it is not hate speech or a false propaganda propagation. A very genuine problem exists in this world and it won't go away just by ignoring it and not labelling it just because some sentiments might be hurt. Liberals even refuse to name the problem for the fear of false generalizations and the ethical dilemmas which they have created for themselves. There is no good or evil in this world, the winners are always good and the losers are always evil, this is how the world works, winners make their own history, they are not stopped by moral dilemmas.

Fourthly, you again made the typical mistake of seeing my post from the Indian/Pakistani perspective. My post has nothing to do with me being Indian, in fact I am disgusted when I see the same issues in the Indian society. People's sentiments are hurt over every little thing here. So you can save your childish attempt of bringing MF hussain into the debate. BTW I am not even a hindu

 

[Asim_khan]

So u r ok with the generalizations but not arrests,u r ok to take side of the Arab Immigrants when rioting but not ok when their force makes biased arrests?

Also your assumption is liberal media doesn't take a stand,they always do esp against the majority religion or ethnicity of their country,but they always think twice before doing it against the religion or ethnicity of minorities,that is hypocrisy as well.

An atheist is only an atheist when he speaks against all religions and bookish creations of God,not just his own.

Where do I even start. From the top I suppose. No, it's not the arrests I'm opposed to, it's the fact that it's only the minorities who are arrested, for doing exactly what the likes of Charlie Hebdo get away with, the Hypocrisy. And I'm ok with people rioting when they're dehumanised, no justice? no peace. That goes for anywhere.

And I didn't say the liberal media doesn't take a stand, I was explaining the reasons as for why they do, because otherwise right wing elements run amok til we have a genocide on our hands. And the reason they think twice before attacking minorities is because it empowers the worst in society, those in the majority looking to find any excuse to attack minorities. Can you find an example where liberals haven't mentioned an incident about minorities? If so, please feel free to share it.

And an Athiest is someone who doesn't beleive, not someone who attacks those who believe.

 

[Asim_khan]

First of all LOL at bringing hindutva media, what has hindutva ever done in history, it is hilarious to see you group hindutva with those other examples.

What have they ever done? They've energised and empowered some of the most despicable, diabolical murderers over the last few years, which has also led to "Thank you Quaid-E-Azam" being the most used expression on this forum.

Secondly, German tabloids didn't create world wars, the underlying political and economic conditions created the world wars. This is what I was talking about before, the liberals are escapists, they are always looking for reasons to not take action. Propaganda is just a small tool but never the cause.

Nobody claimed they caused the world wars, however they definitely led the way in dehumanising the Jewish, the gypsies, the Gays and the disabled, to the point the ordinary German thought it was ok that they were culled. Their was a reason why the 2nd most powerful German during that period was the Minister for propoganda, so I can't agree with your assessment that such talk on propoganda is overplayed. And I've got Genocides within the past 70 years on my side to prove it.

Thirdly, I am not blindly in favor of free speech, hate speech should be stopped and propaganda wars do exist and do cause damage ( but libtards always like to overplay its importance, propaganda won't work without the underlying conditions). In this case however, it is not hate speech or a false propaganda propagation. A very genuine problem exists in this world and it won't go away just by ignoring it and not labelling it just because some sentiments might be hurt. Liberals even refuse to name the problem for the fear of false generalizations and the ethical dilemmas which they have created for themselves. There is no good or evil in this world, the winners are always good and the losers are always evil, this is how the world works, winners make their own history, they are not stopped by moral dilemmas.

Dude you're sounding like Donald Trump. He was railing against Obama for not calling it Islamist terror, or Islamic terror, and said that was where the war was being lost, so as soon as he got in, he started calling it by this exact name, and guess what? The killing, the terror and what not didn't end, infact it's simply escalated. Isn't it telling that the vast majority of victims of terror are muslims, and yet they themselves refuse to call them Islamic terrorists, instead calling them names like DAESH, which to all intents and purposes the Terrorists hate. But I guess those with their love of titles like libtards, sickularists and presstitutes know better.

Fourthly, you again made the typical mistake of seeing my post from the Indian/Pakistani perspective. My post has nothing to do with me being Indian, in fact I am disgusted when I see the same issues in the Indian society. People's sentiments are hurt over every little thing here. So you can save your childish attempt of bringing MF hussain into the debate. BTW I am not even a hindu

Ok. I didn't aim that particular remark at you, so I don't why you took it so personally, after all Kohli has fans even in Australia, just as Michael Clark. But now that you say it, I've never seen a non Hindu defend Hindutva so vociferously. I feel like I did the time I found someone from Azaad Kashmir who wanted to be annexed by India rather than choose independence or Pakistan.

 

[JaDed]

Where do I even start. From the top I suppose. No, it's not the arrests I'm opposed to, it's the fact that it's only the minorities who are arrested, for doing exactly what the likes of Charlie Hebdo get away with, the Hypocrisy. And I'm ok with people rioting when they're dehumanised, no justice? no peace. That goes for anywhere.

And I didn't say the liberal media doesn't take a stand, I was explaining the reasons as for why they do, because otherwise right wing elements run amok til we have a genocide on our hands. And the reason they think twice before attacking minorities is because it empowers the worst in society, those in the majority looking to find any excuse to attack minorities. Can you find an example where liberals haven't mentioned an incident about minorities? If so, please feel free to share it.

And an Athiest is someone who doesn't beleive, not someone who attacks those who believe.

Aren't you contradict yourself? Liberal media thinks twice before attacking minority but not when it's majority or conservatives?So that is what basically I was saying.

It's similar to how news is shared,for example in a minority scenario, xxx religion boy returns bag worth money left in cab,in this case xxx being minority.

The same news will either not even get print time or will shared as boy returns bag worth of money in case majority.

And didn't mean to say Atheists should attack people following faith,but their foundation is based on proving organized religion wrong,they need to do it equally,esp the journalists, without taking bias.

 

[Asim_khan]

Aren't you contradict yourself? Liberal media thinks twice before attacking minority but not when it's majority or conservatives?So that is what basically I was saying.

It's similar to how news is shared,for example in a minority scenario, xxx religion boy returns bag worth money left in cab,in this case xxx being minority.

The same news will either not even get print time or will shared as boy returns bag worth of money in case majority.

And didn't mean to say Atheists should attack people following faith,but their foundation is based on proving organized religion wrong,they need to do it equally,esp the journalists, without taking bias.

Contradicting myself? How? I explained to you why certain sections of the "liberal" media don't attack minorities. The rights and wrongs of it we can discuss all day, it isn't gonna change anything. And when do they go all out and attack conservatives/majority like you want them to attack minorities? If you can give an example like I provided with Charlie Hebdo, I'd be much obliged.

Funny how you bring up a returning money example, but not how Muslims, blacks and Gays are typecast by the media, which far exceed any positive media portrayals. For instance in west you'll never see headlines like "white Christian straight guy does xxx", whereas "black Muslim gay transgender does xxxx" adorns front pages

And plenty of atheist journalists attack Islam, however they get precious when it's shown than they attack Islam more than other religions.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Aren't you contradict yourself? Liberal media thinks twice before attacking minority but not when it's majority or conservatives?So that is what basically I was saying.

It's similar to how news is shared,for example in a minority scenario, xxx religion boy returns bag worth money left in cab,in this case xxx being minority.

The same news will either not even get print time or will shared as boy returns bag worth of money in case majority.

And didn't mean to say Atheists should attack people following faith,but their foundation is based on proving organized religion wrong,they need to do it equally,esp the journalists, without taking bias.

And do you know why liberals have a soft stand towards the minority? Because it is the weaker segment of the society, and the only way to be fair is to be extra supportive of the minority.

Of course, it doesn't mean to pander to the extremists within the minority.

Political correctness exists for a reason. It is usually the bigots who are most anti political correctness, why? because they want to use it to malign the entire communities by picking on the extremists among them. Political correctness is meant to protect the average minority from the bigotry of those who hate them.

 

[Robert]

This is the reason liberals can never make a tough decision, they are always worried about sentiments or hurting feelings or taking the moral high ground. Get back to the real world, one shouldn't back away from pointing out the problem even if it is falsely generalzing a group or hurting their sentiments. Problems are solved by doers and not by moral fools who won't take any action due to the ethical dilemma involved

A real liberal would stick up for free speech, FYI. But how does falsely generalising a minority help? It doesn't, it makes things worse in what you call "the real world". How are Charlie Hebdo "doers"? - they are just stirring the pot for the sake of looking clever and aloof.

 

[FreakCricket]

Jew's have been facing discrimination their entire lives. Heck, to this day there are so many jokes about Jews thrown out so casually, in cinema, TV, real life or even cartoons. But you don't see them going crazy about it. As Muslims, we need to relax and quite frankly - man up.

The world isn't Utopia. People will ridicule you, your faith, your people, your beliefs and your religion. You've just got to accept it and move on. That doesn't mean you start attacking them because that's what they want with this, for you to prove them right. If your feelings get hurt and you're too sensitive then the internet, the news, Muslim minority countries and basically the world isn't for you. Stay in your shell

Utopia is your favorite word, isn't it ? lol
I think muslim world needs a reform, they take their book way too literally.

 

[Jadz]

Utopia is your favorite word, isn't it ? lol
I think muslim world needs a reform, they take their book way too literally.

What does this have to do with the topic under discussion?

Muslims appreciate your concerns, no doubt, but this publication is French and non-Muslim. No need to divert attention.

 

[James]

What does this have to do with the topic under discussion?

Muslims appreciate your concerns, no doubt, but this publication is French and non-Muslim. No need to divert attention.

What he's saying is that when someone says the Torah is a load of rubbish or publically critiques Jews then the Jewish community generally shrugs to itself and gets on with life.

However when it comes to people questioning or mocking the central ideas of Islam there always seems to be a strong reaction - one or any of the following: protests, fatwas, death threats, riots and / or murders. Examples include Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, Tom Holland, Charlie Hebdo etc.

BTW I think ridiculing religions is 100% wrong, and I also think that using religions as a target to incite hatred and violence is equally wrong. Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, Holland and the French humour rag were all wrong and I disagree with what they all did. But have the responses to these incidents been proportionate? Absolutely not.

 

[KingKhanWC]

What he's saying is that when someone says the Torah is a load of rubbish or publically critiques Jews then the Jewish community generally shrugs to itself and gets on with life.

However when it comes to people questioning or mocking the central ideas of Islam there always seems to be a strong reaction - one or any of the following: protests, fatwas, death threats, riots and / or murders. Examples include Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, Tom Holland, Charlie Hebdo etc.

BTW I think ridiculing religions is 100% wrong, and I also think that using religions as a target to incite hatred and violence is equally wrong. Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, Holland and the French humour rag were all wrong and I disagree with what they all did. But have the responses to these incidents been proportionate? Absolutely not.

Fair point James.

I would say two things. Firstly there around 15 millions Jews in the world and secondly they are no longer being targeted for death around the world. The fascists do target them but Islam is now targeted by the mainstream inc openly by so called respected media. When you have 2 billion people who feel under threat from either violence, discrimination or abuse of their faith a tiny tiny fraction would react in harsh ways.

 

[James]

Fair point James.

I would say two things. Firstly there around 15 millions Jews in the world and secondly they are no longer being targeted for death around the world. The fascists do target them but Islam is now targeted by the mainstream inc openly by so called respected media. When you have 2 billion people who feel under threat from either violence, discrimination or abuse of their faith a tiny tiny fraction would react in harsh ways.

And a fair response too. The sad thing is that it is a tiny fraction but the media paints everyone with the same brush. Ironically out of the "People of the Book" it is Christians who get talked about by the media in by far the least disparaging terms, however ordinary Muslims and ordinary Jews are generally decent people, but the majority of Christians that I have met (even in run of the mill churches) have been devout, intolerant and hardcore.

 

[Gilly]

And a fair response too. The sad thing is that it is a tiny fraction but the media paints everyone with the same brush. Ironically out of the "People of the Book" it is Christians who get talked about by the media in by far the least disparaging terms, however ordinary Muslims and ordinary Jews are generally decent people, but the majority of Christians that I have met (even in run of the mill churches) have been devout, intolerant and hardcore.

So in your opinion James Christians are more devout than Jews and Muslims. Is that what you are saying?.

 

[James]

So in your opinion James Christians are more devout than Jews and Muslims. Is that what you are saying?.

Coming from a Christian background I would say so, well the Christians who go to Church anyway, which many don't of course. Christians who go to Church are generally extremely outward, loud and extroverted about their faith.

 

[Jadz]

What he's saying is that when someone says the Torah is a load of rubbish or publically critiques Jews then the Jewish community generally shrugs to itself and gets on with life.

However when it comes to people questioning or mocking the central ideas of Islam there always seems to be a strong reaction - one or any of the following: protests, fatwas, death threats, riots and / or murders. Examples include Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, Tom Holland, Charlie Hebdo etc.

BTW I think ridiculing religions is 100% wrong, and I also think that using religions as a target to incite hatred and violence is equally wrong. Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, Holland and the French humour rag were all wrong and I disagree with what they all did. But have the responses to these incidents been proportionate? Absolutely not.

I respectfully disagree with your view in relation to Jews and their response to criticism or what may be perceived to be discrimination. Jews are extremely sensitive about how they are treated, unsurprisingly, given their tragic history. This explains Jewish organisations that carefully monitor and record anti-Semitic speech, actions and violence.

Regarding Muslims and their response to criticism or mockery of Islam: scholars, academics and intellectuals do not react with heated or exaggerated emotion, they react with reason. This is because they are well-versed in the Qur'an and its language, they possess knowledge of the life of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), who was routinely abused, insulted, mocked and verbally/physically attacked. Suffice to say, he did not respond in kind.

For the rest, you are absolutely right, many Muslims do behave as if they are intellectually dead, when confronted with 'insults' about Islam and/or the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). They do not use their reason, do not follow the life-example of the Prophet they claim to believe in, nor do they conduct themselves the way the Qur'an requires them to, which is: with patience, dignity and trust in God.

I agree with you, in that targeting religion to deliberately incite hatred and violence is wrong. However, and again, with all due respect, there is nothing new under the sun here. Since time immemorial, people have mocked religion, abused the Faithful, murdered the Prophets of God, such as Zachariah and his son John attempted to assassinate Abraham as well as Jesus, and slandered his blessed Mother, Mary (pbut).

Faith is all about being tested, of having one's beliefs challenged, of being opposed and, perhaps, of being rejected by the majority. There is no purpose to faith if it is never challenged, opposed, if one is never rejected by family, community or society. Suffering, struggles and sacrifices defined the lives of the Prophets and their sincere followers, they complained little but continued to serve humankind for the sake of God.

In brief: 'have the responses to these incidents been proportionate? Absolutely not.' Completely agree with you, and well said!

 

[Abdullah719]

French magazine Charlie Hebdo portrays hijabi student 'as a monkey'

Maryam Pougetoux, leader of a student union at Paris' Sorbonne University, is the latest victim of Islamophobic hate after appearing in a documentary ... in a hijab.

In it, the 19-year-old student talked about the ongoing student protests in France. She was met with immense hate online - not for her views, but merely because she wears the hijab.

France's interior minister, Gerard Collomb, was among those who criticized the student's appearance, referring to Pougetoux's choice of attire as a "provocation," according to BBC.

Marlene Schiappa, the country's Equality Minister, called it a "form of promotion of political Islam."

In an interview with BuzzFeed News, the 19-year-old called the entire debate "pathetic."

"I wasn’t expecting it to become a government matter," she said.

"My veil has no political function. It is given a political meaning that I don’t give it myself."

"It is my faith," she added. "I shouldn't have to justify myself."


The hate was taken to another level by one French magazine

French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo - which has previously sparked controversy over its anti-Islam cartoons - released a vile cartoon in light of the hate, in which it depicted the 19-year-old as a monkey.

The cartoon's thought bubble reads: "they chose me to head the UNEF (French National Student Union)."

https://stepfeed.com/french-magazine-charlie-hebdo-portrays-hijabi-student-as-a-monkey-3967

 

[Arham_PakFan]

This is pathetic.Both bigoted and racist.Poor girl,at the center of a nationwide controversy that she clearly didn't want to start.

 

[Suleiman]

That’s not even a clever cartoon, it’s just... mean.

 

[www787]

Remind me of those has been entertainer who has to say dumbest crap to stay relevant.

 

[Abdullah719]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Isn’t she white? In which case, it’s unlikely that it’s her race being pointed to. Perhaps they’re satirising her ‘blind’ decision to follow an uber-conservative religious tradition as a liberated French woman</p>— Maajid - (Mājid) [maːʤɪd] ماجد (@MaajidNawaz) <a href="https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1001372506933129216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 29, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Isn’t she white? In which case, it’s unlikely that it’s her race being pointed to. Perhaps they’re satirising her ‘blind’ decision to follow an uber-conservative religious tradition as a liberated French woman</p>— Maajid - (Mājid) [maːʤɪd] ماجد (@MaajidNawaz) <a href="https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1001372506933129216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 29, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

She's not white, looks like Arab descent, Maaajid making a fool of himself trying to justify a crass cartoon.

 

[James]

Maajid is an expert troll.

 

[Bhaijaan]

They are recreating caricatures of Prophet Mohammad

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

They are recreating caricatures of Prophet Mohammad

What a desperate, pathetic and potentially dangerous move to stay relevant.

All for what? A stupid hashtag?

 

[El Generico]

What a desperate, pathetic and potentially dangerous move to stay relevant.

All for what? A stupid hashtag?

Apparently before the 2015 incident, this organization was on the verge of financial ruin but the limelight they got helped them recover. They be might in financial strife again hence their desperate yipping for attention. Hopefully people ignore them and don’t give them any sort of attention.

 

[sweep_shot]

Charlie Hebdo is a stupid magazine. They need these attention seeking stunts to stay relevant.

 

[Slog]

Charlie Hebdo is a stupid magazine. They need these attention seeking stunts to stay relevant.

And reactions from you and other people is ensuring they do stay relevant. Just ignore

 

[Aviator]

Why not make a cartoon on hitler and 6 million jews?

 

[MenInG]

Fourteen people are to go on trial in France over the deadly attack on the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo more than five years ago.
Most of the alleged accomplices will stand trial in Paris on Wednesday, but three will be tried in absentia.

They are accused of helping the militant Islamist attackers who shot dead 12 people in and around Charlie Hebdo's offices in January 2015.

A third gunman shot dead a policewoman and attacked a Jewish supermarket.

In total, 17 people were killed in a period of just three days. The killings marked the beginning of a wave of jihadist attacks across France that left more than 250 people dead.

In the days following the attacks, millions of people took part in solidarity marches across France and around the world under the slogan "Je suis Charlie" (I am Charlie).

The magazine has marked the start of the trial by reprinting controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad that sparked protests in several Muslim countries. President Emmanuel Macron defended the freedom of the press and the French "freedom to blaspheme, which is linked to freedom of conscience".

What's expected at the trial?

Fourteen people stand accused of helping to prepare and plan the killings. Their trial starts on Wednesday after the proceedings were postponed for almost four months because of the coronavirus pandemic.

In March, the presiding judge said France's lockdown measures had made it impossible to bring together "all the parties, witnesses and experts under the necessary sanitary conditions".

The alleged accomplices are accused of obtaining weapons and providing logistical support for the attack on Charlie Hebdo's office on 7 January 2015, as well as the subsequent attacks on a police officer and the Hyper Cacher supermarket.

But three suspects are believed to have disappeared in northern Syria and Iraq and will be tried in absentia. Some reports suggest the three men were later killed in bombing campaigns against the Islamic State group (IS), but this has not been confirmed.

There are about 200 plaintiffs in the trial and survivors of the attacks are expected to testify, France's RFI broadcaster reports.
On Monday, the anti-terror prosecutor Jean-François Ricard dismissed the suggestion that it was just "little helpers" who were facing justice.

"It is about individuals who are involved in the logistics, the preparation of the events, who provided means of financing, operational material, weapons [and] a residence," he told France Info radio. "All this is essential to the terrorist action."

The trial is expected to last until November.

What happened in 2015?

On 7 January that year, two French Muslim gunmen stormed the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo in the Rue Nicolas-Appert before opening fire on its staff.

The magazine's editor at the time, Stéphane Charbonnier, better known as Charb, was among four celebrated cartoonists who were killed.

The gunmen were eventually killed by security forces after a lengthy manhunt. Their victims were eight journalists, two police officers, a caretaker and a visitor.

In a related attack just days later, a jihadist gunman killed three customers and an employee in a hostage siege at the Hyper Cacher Jewish supermarket in Porte de Vincennes in the east of Paris.

He had earlier shot dead a policewoman in the city.

Security forces eventually stormed the supermarket before killing him and freeing the remaining hostages.

Why was Charlie Hebdo targeted?

The radical weekly magazine was well known for taking swipes at the establishment and religion and has long drawn controversy.
Cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad brought Charb death threats as well as 24-hour police protection prior to his death. There was also a petrol bomb attack on the magazine's offices in 2011.

The publication has also been seen as a beacon for free speech, with many of its defenders using the hashtag #JeSuisCharlie to defend it.

Charb strongly defended the Prophet Muhammad cartoons as symbolic of freedom of speech. "I don't blame Muslims for not laughing at our drawings," he told the Associated Press in 2012. "I live under French law. I don't live under Koranic law."

And on Tuesday, the magazine republished the cartoons that made them a target in 2015. "We have always refused to do so, not because it is prohibited... but because there was a need for a good reason to do it," an editorial said.

It added: "To reproduce these cartoons in the week the trial begins over the January 2015 terrorist attacks seemed essential to us."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53975350

 

[sweep_shot]

Why not make a cartoon on hitler and 6 million jews?

If people can make cartoons about anyone, this should be allowed too. I agree.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Apparently before the 2015 incident, this organization was on the verge of financial ruin but the limelight they got helped them recover. They be might in financial strife again hence their desperate yipping for attention. Hopefully people ignore them and don’t give them any sort of attention.

Well they are getting plenty of attention, the reprinting of the caricatures has got them headlines in England, so I would imagine it would be the same in other countries of the globe, especially where they have a sympathetic audience. Perhaps their usual stuff isn't all that attractive for potential customers so they need to go beyond norms to get attention of the public.

 

[Firebat]

Charlie Hebdo: French magazine's head of HR 'forced out of home'

Charlie Hebdo magazine's head of HR has left her home because of "precise and detailed threats" to her security guards, French media report.

Marika Bret said her guards, who have protected her for almost five years, received the threats on 14 September.

She blamed "a level of hallucinatory hatred around Charlie Hebdo".

The magazine was the target of a deadly terror attack in January 2015, in which 12 people were killed, after publishing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.

The attacks began a wave of jihadist strikes across France.

Earlier this month the magazine republished the controversial cartoons, ahead of 14 people going on trial accused of assisting the two gunmen in that attack.

Speaking to Le Point magazine, Ms Bret said: "I had 10 minutes to do my business and leave my home, 10 minutes to give up part of my existence... I won't be coming home."

She added that the threats started again with the start of the trial and the republication of the cartoons of Prophet Mohammed earlier this month.

"Since the start of the trial and with the republication of the cartoons, we have received all kinds of horrors, including threats from al-Qaeda and calls to finish the work of the [gunmen from the 2015 attack]," she said.

Read more:

Spoiler

What was in the magazine?

The front cover of the issue of Charlie Hebdo published at the start of September featured the 12 original cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, which were published in a Danish newspaper before appearing in Charlie Hebdo.

One of the cartoons shows the prophet wearing a bomb instead of a turban. The French headline reads "Tout ça pour ça" ("All of that for this").

In its editorial, the magazine said that it had often been asked to carry on printing caricatures of the prophet since the 2015 killings.

"We have always refused to do so, not because it is prohibited - the law allows us to do so - but because there was a need for a good reason to do it, a reason which has meaning and which brings something to the debate," it said.

"To reproduce these cartoons in the week the trial over the January 2015 terrorist attacks opens seemed essential to us."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54251389

 

[James]

Charlie Hebdo is an extremely mischievous and offensive publication. Equally, none of them should have been killed for what they printed.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Charlie Hebdo is an extremely mischievous and offensive publication. Equally, none of them should have been killed for what they printed.

Don't like the beast, is what I say

 

[ex-q-zit]

Iran Warns France Over Ayatollah Khamenei's Cartoons In Charlie Hebdo

Iran warned France on Wednesday of consequences after satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo published cartoons depicting supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that Tehran deemed to be insulting.

The weekly had published dozens of cartoons ridiculing the highest religious and political figure in the Islamic republic as part of a competition it launched in December in support of the three-month-old protest movement.

"The insulting and indecent act of a French publication in publishing cartoons against the religious and political authority will not go without an effective and decisive response," tweeted Iran's Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian.

"We will not allow the French government to go beyond its bounds. They have definitely chosen the wrong path," he added, without spelling out the consequences.

Later on Wednesday, Iran's foreign ministry said it had summoned French ambassador Nicolas Roche.

"France has no right to insult the sanctities of other Muslim countries and nations under the pretext of freedom of expression", foreign ministry spokesman Nasser Kanani said.

"Iran is waiting for the French government's explanation and compensatory action in condemning the unacceptable behaviour of the French publication," he added.

Seen by supporters as a champion of freedom of speech and by critics as needlessly provocative, Charlie Hebdo's style is controversial even within France.

But the country was united in grief when in January 2015 it was targeted in a deadly attack by Islamist gunmen who claimed to be avenging the magazine's decision to publish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed.

- 'Not last word' -

The issue contained a variety of sexual images depicting Khamenei and fellow clerics. Other cartoons pointed to the authorities' use of capital punishment as a tactic to quell the protests.

"It was a way to show our support for Iranian men and women who risk their lives to defend their freedom against the theocracy that has oppressed them since 1979," Charlie Hebdo's director Laurent Sourisseau, known as Riss, wrote in an editorial.

All the cartoons published "have the merit of defying the authority that the supposed supreme leader claims to be, as well as the cohort of his servants and other henchmen," he added.

Nathalie Loiseau, a French MEP and former minister loyal to President Emmanuel Macron, described Iran's response as an "interference attempt and threat" to Charlie Hebdo.

"Let it be perfectly clear: the repressive and theocratic regime in Tehran has nothing to teach France," she said.

Khamenei, the successor of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, is appointed for life. Above day-to-day politics, criticism of him is prohibited inside Iran.

Khomeini in 1989 famously issued a religious decree, or fatwa, ordering Muslims to kill the British author Salman Rushdie for what he deemed the blasphemous nature of "The Satanic Verses".

Many activists blamed Iran last year when the writer was stabbed at an event in New York but Tehran denied any link.

The Iranian regime has been shaken by three months of protests triggered by the September 16 death in custody of Mahsa Amini, an Iranian Kurd who was arrested for allegedly violating the country's strict dress code for women.

It has responded with a crackdown that Oslo-based group Iran Human Rights said has killed at least 476 people in protests, which Iranian officials generally describe as "riots".

Charlie Hebdo published the caricatures in a special edition to mark the anniversary of the deadly attack on its Paris office, which left 12 people dead, including some of its best known cartoonists.

"Eight years later, religious intolerance has not said its last word," its director said.

"It continues its work in defiance of international protests and respect for the most basic human rights."

NDTV

 

[ex-q-zit]

Charlie Hebdo Attack Victims Honoured As Iran Fumes Over New Cartoons

French politicians paid tribute Saturday to Charlie Hebdo staff and other victims of the January 2015 Islamist attacks, days after the satirical weekly's latest edition sparked outrage in Iran.

French President Emmanuel Macron tweeted the names of all 17 victims of a spate of attacks eight years ago in and around Paris, including the 12 people killed at the offices of Charlie Hebdo.

"We will never forget you," he added, with a cartoon by the well-known French cartoonist Plantu below.

Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne also marked the anniversary of the attacks, which also involved a deadly siege at a kosher supermarket.

"In the face of Islamist terrorism, the Republic remains standing," she tweeted. "For their families, for our values, for our liberty: we do not forget."

And Culture Minister Rima Abdul Malak tweeted: "Satire, irreverence, the republican tradition of press cartoons are intrinsic to our democracy. We continue to defend them."

The tributes came days after Tehran reacted furiously to cartoons mocking Iran's leadership in the latest issue of Charlie Hebdo, which appeared on Wednesday.

The magazine had invited cartoonists to depict Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the context of ongoing demonstrations against his theocratic regime, by women in particular.

The graphic front cover sought to highlight the fight for women's rights, while others were sexually explicit and insulting towards Khamenei and fellow clerics.

Many cartoons pointed to the authorities' use of capital punishment as a tactic to quell the protests.

- Tehran's anger -

In response, Iran summoned France's ambassador and called on the government to hold "the authors of such hatred" to account.

On Thursday, it said it was closing the Tehran-based French Institute for Research (IFRI).

"France has no right to insult the sanctities of other Muslim countries and nations under the pretext of freedom of expression," foreign ministry spokesman Nasser Kanani said.

In Paris on Saturday, Interior Minister Gerard Darmanin and the city's mayor Anne Hidalgo were among the politicians who attended a ceremony at the former offices of Charlie Hebdo, in the city's 11th arrondissement.

It was there that two gunmen killed staff at the magazine, including some of its best-known cartoonists.

A few metres further down the same street, police lieutenant Ahmed Merabet was gunned down by the killers as he tried to stop their escape.

The gunmen, who claimed to represent Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) said they were taking revenge for previous satirical cartoons in the magazine depicting the Prophet Mohammed. They were killed after two days on the run.

The day after the Charlie Hebdo attack, another Islamist gunman killed a police officer in Montrouge, just outside Paris -- and a day later he killed four hostages at a jewish supermarket in east Paris.

He was shot dead as police stormed the premises and freed the remaining hostages.

NDTV

 

[MenInG]

Tensions between Iran and France are on the boil over the publication of caricatures of the Iranian supreme leader, with the country’s top general warning of revenge.

French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo published a series of caricatures depicting Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in its special issue last week, which Iranian authorities deemed “insulting” to the top political and religious figure.

Many Iranian officials, including the president, foreign minister, top military commanders and senior parliamentarians, have issued statements criticizing the magazine and the French government.

There have also been a series of demonstrations in front of the French Embassy in Tehran in recent days amid growing calls to review diplomatic ties with France.

Express Tribune

 

[SalimBhai]

Why is the Iranian government being so woke.