Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Charlie Hebdo makes fun of drowned Syrian boy.

Options
13567…15

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Fukuyama wrote:
    To me, 2 for the price of 1 made me think of how easily this kid could have been integrated. He wouldn't have cost us that much (in relative terms).


    It could also mean that although there are plenty of children escaping, only half of them might survive the trip


  • Options
    #63
    Dr. Bre
    Registered Users Posts: 7,597 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    I'm running out of things to be offended by. It's great


  • Options
    #64
    kenco
    Registered Users Posts: 1,080 ✭✭✭kenco


    Charlie Hebdo was always very close to the edge (and in some case well over it) with their take on 'humour'. It wasnt always the same target by the way some of the cartoons they had on Christians werent great either.

    What happened at their offices was obviously a hideous cowardly act. Did they draw it on themselves, that can be debated but regardless the response was no excusable.

    This latest cartoon is offensive to many. To others its thought provoking. Some might even look at it and wonder why there is a fuss one way or the other....


  • Options
    #65
    Custardpi
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭Custardpi


    Korbin Witty Neck wrote: »
    I'm being compared to a terrorist... well done, :rolleyes:

    You implied that freedom of speech is something to be mocked & that when people use it to print something with which you disagree that makes them "scum". Many terrorist organisations, such as ISIS would take a similar view. Like I said, you're obviously not as bad as them but you are still choosing to take offense at a cartoon rather than stopping to think about it. That's the sort of closemindedness upon which backward & totalitarian ideologies thrive.


  • Options
    #66
    wendell borton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,336 ✭✭✭wendell borton


    More faux outrage, where do they take fun of the boy? The plastering of his body over the front of the papers was a lot disrespectful, while they didn't seem too bothered about all the other drowned refugees but then they didn't have ghoulish pictures of them.
    Satire is where "vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government or society itself, into improvement" in this case the fact that we in the west, behind all the liberal bluster and faux outrage really couldn't give a **** as they aren't the same as us.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Haznat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭Haznat


    They weren't too quick to depict their dead colleagues in their publication following the attacks. I doubt they would have been impressed if someone else had done it either.


  • Options
    #68
    Custardpi
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭Custardpi


    Haznat wrote: »
    They weren't too quick to depict their dead colleagues in their publication following the attacks. I doubt they would have been impressed if someone else had done it either.

    If somebody had done that I'd be very surprised if staff at the magazine would have called for them to be banned. I'd also imagine that they were pretty shell shocked for a while after experiencing a properly traumatic event like that, as opposed to merely being offended by a cartoon.


  • Options
    #69
    arayess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭arayess


    eet fuk wrote: »
    They should be shot for that type of carry on
    Haznat wrote: »
    They weren't too quick to depict their dead colleagues in their publication following the attacks. I doubt they would have been impressed if someone else had done it either.

    we should shoot them again to teach them a lesson
    and then satire the fcuk out of them by creating a #jesuisISIS hashtag


  • Options
    #70
    Summer wind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,285 ✭✭✭Summer wind


    I don't care how many hidden meanings there are supposed to be in these cartoons. I think it's disgusting. It's never in any way ok to make fun of a dead child.


  • Options
    #71
    Haznat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭Haznat


    Custardpi wrote: »
    If somebody had done that I'd be very surprised if staff at the magazine would have called for them to be banned. I'd also imagine that they were pretty shell shocked for a while after experiencing a properly traumatic event like that, as opposed to merely being offended by a cartoon.

    Nobody did do it though and nobody should have either. What happened to them was terrible but if you want to compare it to the situation in the Syria it was a complete irrelevance.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Summer wind wrote:
    It's never in any way ok to make fun of a dead child.


    Whatever your opinion on the cartoon themselves, I'm pretty sure that's not what they're doing.


  • Options
    #73
    PowerToWait
    Registered Users Posts: 1,775 ✭✭✭PowerToWait


    Don't get how anybody could read these cartoons as "making fun of drowned Syrian boy" as per thread title.

    I'm betting the majority of those offended are not exactly supportive of the plans to give asylum to those same refugees.


  • Options
    #74
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    The McDonald's image is a critique of European consumerism and the use of the actual image by newspapers beside advertisements.


  • Options
    #75
    Canadel
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭Canadel


    Haznat wrote: »
    They weren't too quick to depict their dead colleagues in their publication following the attacks. I doubt they would have been impressed if someone else had done it either.
    They wouldn't have wanted them to be banned from depicting their dead colleagues though; nor would they have shot them for doing so. The key to freedom of speech is in the allowing of speech you disagree with.


  • Options
    #76
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 29,071 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    fook you Charlie!


  • Options
    #77
    Haznat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭Haznat


    Canadel wrote: »
    They wouldn't have wanted them to be banned from depicting their dead colleagues though; nor would they have shot them for doing so. The key to freedom of speech is in the allowing of speech you disagree with.

    Im aware of that but it's a classless act depicting a person with a very real identity days after his death. You could almost make a case for it if it was a devisive character like Maggie Thatcher or Barrack Obama but when it's a completely innocent toddler it crosses a line.

    I'm not saying it should be banned but hopefully it hits them in the pocket.


  • Options
    #78
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,158 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


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


    They had the free pass all along. Remember the unpleasantness in Paris? I thought we all agreed that free speech is acceptable even if it's offensive.

    Christian Europe with nose turned up, piously walking on water while muslim children sink and drown. You don't have to like it but it's making a relevant statement


  • Options
    #79
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    Custardpi wrote: »
    Charlie Hebdo has never been particularly successful financially. I doubt they'll make much money out of country 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.

    Charlie hebdo are intentionally provoking muslims. I'm sure given France s long involvement in syria this man is familar with the country.
    Of course my point was that muslims aren't smart and i am a bigot. Well done you..


  • Options
    #80
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Haznat wrote: »

    I'm not saying it should be banned but hopefully it hits them in the pocket.

    You do realise newspapers all around the world used that actual image alongside their advertisements for profit. You also realises thousands of people have died and then this one picture causes Europe to actual stir from its slumber. CH are satirising Europe, its consumerism and its response to that picture.


  • Options
    #81
    RobertKK
    Registered Users Posts: 33,746 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    They had the free pass all along. Remember the unpleasantness in Paris? I thought we all agreed that free speech is acceptable even if it's offensive.

    Christian Europe with nose turned up, piously walking on water while muslim children sink and drown. You don't have to like it but it's making a relevant statement

    Christian Europe has not turned its nose up, the Pope said every parish should take in a family.
    The ordinary people have been ahead of the politicians on this.
    Maybe it is the people like Charlie Hebdo who have turned their noses up, are they donating the money made from that particular issue towards helping the refugees?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    arayess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭arayess


    i think satire like this is dressed up as oh-so-clever and only the smart will understand but that just covers it's nastiness


  • Options
    #83
    Haznat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭Haznat


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    You do realise newspapers all around the world used that actual image alongside their advertisements for profit. You also realises thousands of people have died and then this one picture causes Europe to actual stir from its slumber. CH are satirising Europe, its consumerism and its response to that picture.

    I do realise that. It doesn't justify either of those cartoons though.

    They're also a profit making business. As with all businesses they're out to make money. Just like the people they're satirising.


  • Options
    #84
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Custardpi wrote: »
    You implied that freedom of speech is something to be mocked & that when people use it to print something with which you disagree that makes them "scum". Many terrorist organisations, such as ISIS would take a similar view. Like I said, you're obviously not as bad as them but you are still choosing to take offense at a cartoon rather than stopping to think about it. That's the sort of closemindedness upon which backward & totalitarian ideologies thrive.

    No I didn't. That's how you interpreted it. Freedom of speech is no excuse to be a díck or to ridicule people. Nobody has the right to act that way. Twist and turn my words however you like. The picture itself doesn't offend me, however, the rag of a magazine that it is, does.

    Whatever point they are trying to make, is lost and I would guess that the majority people who see this image will have similar thoughts.

    I'm obviously not as bad as ISIS, well thanks for clearing that up.


  • Options
    #85
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Christian Europe has not turned its nose up, the Pope said every parish should take in a family.
    The ordinary people have been ahead of the politicians on this.
    Maybe it is the people like Charlie Hebdo who have turned their noses up, are they donating the money made from that particular issue towards helping the refugees?

    You do realise what Angela Merkel's party is called?


  • Options
    #86
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    arayess wrote: »
    i think satire like this is dressed up as oh-so-clever and only the smart will understand but that just covers it's nastiness

    It also gives you a.. what i meant was.. to cover your ass when people don't like it. Clever but cowardly and mean.


  • Options
    #87
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Haznat wrote: »
    I do realise that. It doesn't justify either of those cartoons though.

    They're also a profit making business. As with all businesses they're out to make money. Just like the people they're satirising.

    It does justify it as it is satirising exactly that hypocrisy from large media outlets and Europe as a whole for its response to one picture when thousands had already died.


  • Options
    #88
    RobertKK
    Registered Users Posts: 33,746 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    You do realise what Angela Merkel's party is called?

    Yes and putting €6 billion aside to deal with the refugee crisis and now expect at least 1 million refugees.
    Those Christian Democrats are so evil.


  • Options
    #89
    NIMAN
    Registered Users Posts: 33,355 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    I love how CH was a great publication and flavour of the month when they got shot up, you were a saddo if you didn't support their right to free speech and buy a copy of the mag.

    Now they are the scum of the earth!


  • Options
    #90
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,158 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    RobertKK wrote:
    Christian Europe has not turned its nose up, the Pope said every parish should take in a family. The ordinary people have been ahead of the politicians on this. Maybe it is the people like Charlie Hebdo who have turned their noses up, are they donating the money made from that particular issue towards helping the refugees?

    You're right. The pope has made some humanitarian noises but that hasn't solved anything. Telling ordinary people they should materially help is good but it's hollow coming from the head of an organisation which is so materially wealthy. The child drowned while Europe was deciding how to deal with the situation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Yes and putting €6 billion aside to deal with the refugee crisis and now expect at least 1 million refugees.
    Those Christian Democrats are so evil.

    Germany has just closed its borders along with a few other countries as of today. The response has been phenomenally last minute and the picture was something which awakened the politicians and citizens. The fact that it took the picture to do that when this has been going on for over a year is utterly deplorable. Thousands have died.


Advertisement