Charlie Hebdo makes fun of drowned Syrian boy.

RobertKK

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-cover-cartoon-jokes-about-death-of-drowned-syrian-toddler-aylan-kurdi-10499645.html

https://twitter.com/islamaideology/status/642647579306684416?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

Jokes about Muslims drowning -

https://twitter.com/SimplyRim/status/643025434830065664

I never found drowned children or people for that matter as good material for satire.

Je ne suis pas Charlie.

Menas

Yeah, I don't get it either. Freedom of speech huh?

Señor Fancy Pants

Fcuk sake

That's just horrible. I guess they feel they'll get a free pass on anything they say, no matter how tasteless.

Howard Roark

It was Je Suis Charlie when their jokes offended others and as far as I'm concerned it's still Je suis Charlie nowl, they've never been funny but that's not the point.

RobertKK

Menas wrote: »

Yeah, I don't get it either. Freedom of speech huh?

Freedom of speech is an excuse when people say or express something stupid.

Freedom of speech comes with responsibility, like who the **** goes around printing that **** and think it is ok to act like *****?
We should have no standards and full freedom of speech without expecting there to be consequences.

eet fuk

They should be shot for that type of carry on

My name is URL

Its always been a shitty publication anyway.

Private Eye for idiots

Fukuyama

The one with Jesus walking on water and the toddler drowned is dark as hell, yes. But I think it actually makes a good point. It's unsettling and surprisingly accurate in the point it makes.

Very few people would have actually bought CH before the attacks. It's a dark magazine and often pokes fun of at Islam for no reason.

I defend their right to freedom of speech no matter what - even if it means publishing tasteless cartoons. Doesn't mean I'll enjoy them.

It's also worth nothing that French political satire is traditionally a lot 'stronger' than British/Irish satire.

snubbleste

eet fuk wrote: »

They should be shot for that type of carry on

Ah now.

strelok

RobertKK wrote: »

Freedom of speech is an excuse when people say or express something stupid.

Freedom of speech comes with responsibility, like who the **** goes around printing that **** and think it is ok to act like *****?
We should have no standards and full freedom of speech without expecting there to be consequences.

didn't take long for someone to come along and put the responsibility for the hebdo murders square on the hebdo writers again.

BoJack Horseman

eet fuk wrote: »

They should be shot for that type of carry on

Too soon

Custardpi

RobertKK wrote: »

Freedom of speech is an excuse when people say or express something stupid.

Freedom of speech comes with responsibility, like who the **** goes around printing that **** and think it is ok to act like *****?
We should have no standards and full freedom of speech without expecting there to be consequences.

That depends on what sort of "consequences" you're talking about. Do they include a bullet in the head? That's a consequence several Charlie Hebdo staff have already suffered for daring to print material which some people chose to take offense at. The only justifiable "consequence" they should suffer is that people who don't like the magazine don't buy it. That's pretty much always been the case anyway, they've typically only sold about 40,000 copies or so each week on average.

Teflon Ron

eet fuk wrote: »

They should be shot for that type of carry on

snubbleste wrote: »

Ah now.

But freedom o' speech!

Guy:Incognito

So drawing (no pun etc) satire from something by making a cartoon of it to put your point across is unacceptable but using actual pictures of a dead child is ok? Lets not pretend the papers are some bastions of all things good in the world. They want to sell papers and stir up what suits. Most of them probably dont give 2 ****s about the dead kid.

crazygeryy

Fukuyama wrote: »

The one with Jesus walking on water and the toddler drowned is dark as hell, yes. But I think it actually makes a good point. It's unsettling and surprisingly accurate in the point it makes.

Very few people would have actually bought CH before the attacks. It's a dark magazine and often pokes fun of at Islam for no reason.

I defend their right to freedom of speech no matter what - even if it means publishing tasteless cartoons. Doesn't mean I'll enjoy them.

It's also worth nothing that French political satire is traditionally a lot 'stronger' than British/Irish satire.

theres a name for it and it isnt that!
anyone that finds this even remotely amusing needs there head examined.
****ing idiots deserve everthing they get.

Fukuyama

All the "Je Suis Charlie" heads are going to turn coat because of this, I guarantee it.

Demands for it to be taken down etc... Just like the "Je Suis Over It" T-Shirts in TK MAXX. I can almost smell the rage tainted by hypocrisy.

Pictures of Mohammed in doing various leud acts were all designed to offend Muslims and the PC brigade. These new cartoons are designed to do the same thing, only against Christian/European charity. They provoke thought, anger and self-reflection. You're supposed to ask why you're more angry about a cartoon of a dead kid than the actual dead kid.

goose2005

Candie wrote: »

That's just horrible. I guess they feel they'll get a free pass on anything they say, no matter how tasteless.

Ultimately it makes a valid point; the migrants are seeking material prosperity, not safety. They already have safety where they are.

crazygeryy

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Too soon

too soon?that child is dead a little over a week.too soon for him to maybe?

RobertKK

strelok wrote: »

didn't take long for someone to come along and put the responsibility for the hebdo murders square on the hebdo writers again.

wow, where did I mention that?

I am simply referring to a drowned child.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Hur dur... freedom of speach... hur dur...

Just NO!

Charlie Hebdo are scum. I have always held that view. Cowards hide behind "freedom of speach" bullsh!t. There's no need to publish those images. Degenerate bottom feeders.

Yakult

It's gets them views I guess...
Personally find it quiet distasteful but free speech and tbh worse things have happened/been said on this whole matter.


Just avoid them for good now

Custardpi

crazygeryy wrote: »

theres a name for it and it isnt that!
anyone that finds this even remotely amusing needs there head examined.
****ing idiots deserve everthing they get.

Do you seriously think that they're making fun of the plight of the dead boy? Really? Did it not enter your head that they could instead be trying to provoke a reaction in people & get them thinking about the situation in a new light by using dark humour? There are a hell of a lot of people looking at Charlie cartoons using their own particular cultural lens without actually recognising that different countries have different styles of humour. I doubt very much that the CH cartoonists meant the cartoon to be interpreted in the manner which you & others have done.

Fukuyama

crazygeryy wrote: »

theres a name for it and it isnt that!
anyone that finds this even remotely amusing needs there head examined.
****ing idiots deserve everthing they get.

I find your thought process on this amazing.

CH staff deserve "everything they get"?! Seriously?

Look at the moral outrage over a cartoon.

UK, French, (western) EU and Irish politicians have had their electorates turn on them in the past month. Voters want MORE refugees in their countries.

However, there are still the uneducated, slack jaw idiots in both countries who want to "send em back" to Syria. This cartoon will do more for the refugees by getting these idiots on board the wave of sympathy currently rising. It will unite voters against this sickening, attempted 'comic' portrayal of Europe's hypocrisy by using the dead child we all fawned over last week.

That's French satire for you. Highly effective at making everyone angry; but ultimately it has a very sharp point to it. Much like their cheese.

Custardpi

Korbin Witty Neck wrote: »

Hur dur... freedom of speach... hur dur...

Just NO!

Charlie Hebdo are scum. I have always held that view. Cowards hide behind "freedom of speach" bullsh!t. There's no need to publish those images. Degenerate bottom feeders.

Whatever about the current images you're talking about a magazine which has faced down death from people who were merely offended by a cartoon. Whatever they may be they certainly are not cowards. The "bottom feeders" are people who would kill over images & words, regardless of how "offensive" they are. People who give creedence to such offense taking such as yourself are almost as bad.

frozenfrozen

You don't have to like them or enjoy them but if you don't understand them or satire in general then you should just look away, no point in getting yourself upset over it.

I like the second one, it's clever.

The_Valeyard

Its a scummy thing to publish. But they have the right to do it. I personally find it repulsive.


I get what RobertKK is saying. Just because we have free speech, doesnt mean we get to abuse it or be malicious for the sake of it.

On the flip side, you do not get to blow the heads off someone because their speech offends you.

My name is URL

Fukuyama wrote: »

I find your thought process on this amazing.

CH staff deserve "everything they get"?! Seriously?

Look at the moral outrage over a cartoon.

UK, French, (western) EU and Irish politicians have had their electorates turn on them in the past month. Voters want MORE refugees in their countries.

However, there are still the uneducated, slack jaw idiots in both countries who want to "send em back" to Syria. This cartoon will do more for the refugees by getting these idiots on board the wave of sympathy currently rising. It will unite voters against this sickening, attempted 'comic' portrayal of Europe's hypocrisy by using the dead child we all fawned over last week.

That's French satire for you. Highly effective at making everyone angry; but ultimately it has a very sharp point to it. Much like their cheese.

Wishful thinking there

Phoebas

Fukuyama wrote: »

You're supposed to ask why you're more angry about a cartoon of a dead kid than the actual dead kid.

Was there some secret code printed in the cartoon to tell us how we were supposed to properly interpret it?

pmasterson95

Howard Roark wrote: »

It was Je Suis Charlie when their jokes offended others and as far as I'm concerned it's still Je suis Charlie nowl, they've never been funny but that's not the point.

Thats not how the bandwagon works. Charlie Hebdo is soo last season. Now its all about Syria.

fiachr_a

They should be making fun of Ireland, bringing in 20,000 refugees because Joan Burton got upset when she saw that photo.

Fukuyama

This cartoon is having the desired effect. Bravo to CH writers and staff for their bravery.

The Irish Navy picked up 600 migrants a few weeks back onto one ship. Loads of dead kids floating in the water there. The Defence Forces had to fly out councilors for the sailors after they dealt with plucking dozens upon dozens of bodies out of the water. And that was just one migrant ship people.

CH has just served up the most pungent, stinking, rotten dish to Europe. This will force people to really consider what's happening in the kitchen.

Better than Irish political satire. French satire doesn't only get to the heart of the issue, it gets to the heart of the reader.

It's a sad reflection on Western society that we need to be sickened before we will act. Not saying I'm any better, btw.

Nodin

Fukuyama wrote: »

The one with Jesus walking on water and the toddler drowned is dark as hell, yes. But I think it actually makes a good point. It's unsettling and surprisingly accurate in the point it makes.

Very few people would have actually bought CH before the attacks. It's a dark magazine and often pokes fun of at Islam for no reason.

I defend their right to freedom of speech no matter what - even if it means publishing tasteless cartoons. Doesn't mean I'll enjoy them.

It's also worth nothing that French political satire is traditionally a lot 'stronger' than British/Irish satire.

I get the second one (I think), its the first one with mc donalds that flies over my head.

HamsterFace

They've always been a d1ckhead magazine. It in no way excuses what happened to them but it doesn't mean they're not ****

Custardpi

Phoebas wrote: »

Was there some secret code printed in the cartoon to tell us how we were supposed to properly interpret it?

If your immediate reaction to provocative & challenging material such as Charlie Hebdo is to go "Waaah, that's offensive!!! Take it away!! :eek::eek::eek: " then you're probably not intellectually equipped to interpret the material in anything other than a superficial way. Best stick to cartoons & publications which make their points in a more direct & unambiguous fashion.

mahamageehad

Looks like the posts have been pulled, they worked the first time I clicked the link but not now.

Phoebas

Custardpi wrote: »

If your immediate reaction to provocative & challenging material such as Charlie Hebdo is to go "Waaah, that's offensive!!! Take it away!! :eek::eek::eek: " then you're probably not intellectually equipped to interpret the material in anything other than a superficial way. Best stick to cartoons & publications which make their points in a more direct & unambiguous fashion.

I don't know how to interpret that post!

Mind you, nor did I think that Charlie Hebdo's target market was the 'intellectually equipped'.

Fukuyama

My name is URL wrote: »

Wishful thinking there

People love a good high horse to jump on. We'll have lots of people, Sky News correspondents, politicians "condemning" ( :rolleyes: ) these cartoons. We'll all get together and say how awful it is to make fun of the refugees.

And it'll increase support for the refugees.

Anyone who paid attention in LC English should be able to spot this for what it is. A simple, dark, satirical cartoon that forces people to twist in their seat and think about how THEY think about the refugees.

melissak

Custardpi wrote: »

If your immediate reaction to provocative & challenging material such as Charlie Hebdo is to go "Waaah, that's offensive!!! Take it away!! :eek::eek::eek: " then you're probably not intellectually equipped to interpret the material in anything other than a superficial way. Best stick to cartoons & publications which make their points in a more direct & unambiguous fashion.

I hope the childs family are more intellectually equipped to decipher the point in a non superficial way. If i had just lost my two little boys and my wife and pricks like charlie were making money about how funny it was in the country whos terrible foreign policy and greed had ruined my country. But sure they're only muslims....

Autonomous Cowherd

Why does everything have to be irony nowadays, ranging from full-on no-fcuks-given satire to that modern, knowing, jaded apathy at the predictability of it all.

Pervasive irony rips the heart out of all good things, it seems to me, and like an accusation will always leave a taint in its wake, even if what it commented upon was innocent.

I think it is lazy. Not clever. Just a lazy way of looking at the complex world.

Custardpi

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't know how to interpret that post!

Mind you, nor did I think that Charlie Hebdo's target market was the 'intellectually equipped'.

Then you'd be wrong. Charlie Hebdo was & is highly thought of among many French intellectuals, particularly those on the Left. After a previous attack on their offices staff from the magazine worked for a time out of the premises of Libération newspaper.

Nodin

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't know how to interpret that post!

Mind you, nor did I think that Charlie Hebdo's target market was the 'intellectually equipped'.

O they'd have to have some brains to speak the French at least.

osarusan

They make fun of everything.

If we (the general 'we') support their right to do so, they're eventually going to make fun of something that upsets us (the general 'us').

Fukuyama

Nodin wrote: »

I get the second one (I think), its the first one with mc donalds that flies over my head.

The big text translates to:

"So Close But...." and the reader hears in his mind "so far away". That is how we treat Syrian kids. They lie face down in the Mediterranean.

The MacDonalds ad is firstly a symbol of Western capitalism and society. It's also known for being a kids restaurant.

The ad reads "2 kid meals for the price of 1". So it's like the kid just innocently wanted a happy meal (an everyday item for EU kids) so he came to Europe. The 2 for the price of 1 shows how easily he COULD have been integrated with his fellow EU kids. He wouldn't have cost them much, if anything at all.

Again, it's dark. But I think it's a good reality check. Instead of showing us boring numbers (X amount of refugees cross the med every day bah blah blah), CH is showing us the need of these people through something every one of us enjoyed as a kid: a Happy Meal.

Martial9

Fukuyama wrote: »

UK, French, (western) EU and Irish politicians have had their electorates turn on them in the past month. Voters want MORE refugees in their countries.

Polls say different in all three countries.

strelok

osarusan wrote: »

They make fun of everything.

If we (the general 'we') support their right to do so, they're eventually going to make fun of something that upsets us (the general 'us').

no, muslims get upset about and demand censorship of stupid things. we're good europeans, when we get upset and demand that someones voice be silenced, we have good, moral, high-minded reasons.

we're just a better class of people.

Canadel

eet fuk wrote: »

They should be shot for that type of carry on

They were shot for publishing pictures of a fictional character who died thousands of years ago. They most likely won't be shot for this. I think that says far more about those doing the shooting than it does Charlie Hebdo.

Diabhal Beag

Who knew a magazine that depicted Jews in the most harsh fashion with their "edgy toons" could be so controversial.

Phoebas

Custardpi wrote: »

Then you'd be wrong. Charlie Hebdo was & is highly thought of among many French intellectuals, particularly those on the Left. After a previous attack on their offices staff from the magazine worked for a time out of the premises of Libération newspaper.

Well, if leftist French intellectuals think its ok, then .....

Fukuyama

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

Why does everything have to be irony nowadays, ranging from full-on no-fcuks-given satire to that modern, knowing, jaded apathy at the predictability of it all.

Pervasive irony rips the heart out of all good things, it seems to me, and like an accusation will always leave a taint in its wake, even if what it commented upon was innocent.

I think it is lazy. Not clever. Just a lazy way of looking at the complex world.

There's nothing ironic or jaded about the cartoons? I can't detect any irony. Where is the irony?

This isn't something an emotional teenager scribbled in a notebook.

I think they're very deep, clever cartoons if you give them the time of day. Quite effective too. They strike a chord in a way the UN Report on the Syrian Crisis, Volume 14 never could.

Custardpi

melissak wrote: »

I hope the childs family are more intellectually equipped to decipher the point in a non superficial way. If i had just lost my two little boys and my wife and pricks like charlie were making money about how funny it was in the country whos terrible foreign policy and greed had ruined my country. But sure they're only muslims....

Charlie Hebdo has never been particularly successful financially. I doubt they'll make much money out of this or most of their other issues. If I was the kids family I probably would have more things to worry about than what some magazine in a country I'd never been to was publishing. As for the "only Muslims" aspect why would you assume that Muslims are incapable of understanding the intent of the cartoon? Isn't that setting low expectations of them? That sounds pretty bigoted to me.