The cartoon world’s double standards on freedom of speech…
Charlie Hebdo mocks the prophet Muhammad through insulting cartoons and calls it satire. As a result, half of the magazine’s staff is wiped out by terrorists in the name of Allah. The massacre raises questions about “freedom of speech.” The cartoon world, media, governments and intellectuals all have double standards regarding the answer.
When the world was condemning the January 7th attack on the satirical magazine, Muslim heroes were being applauded and world leaders and dignitaries were walking in a march for unity, although it was not shoulder to shoulder: 
Critics suggest images show dignitaries ‘didn’t lead march’ after all, but many still speak positively about display of global unity
Then came the breaking news – a reminder that 80-year-old Maurice Sinet, political cartoonist with Charlie Hebdo for 20 years, was fired in 2009 for his anti-Semitic cartoons mocking the relationship of former French President Sarkozy’s son with a wealthy Jewish woman.
Maurice Sinet, known to the world as Siné, faced charges of “inciting racial hatred” for a column he wrote in July 2009. “L’affaire Sine,” followed the engagement of Jean Sarkozy to Jessica Sebaoun-Darty, the Jewish heiress of a major consumer electronics company, the Darty Group. Commenting on rumours that Jean intended to convert from Catholicism to Judaism (Jessica’s religion) for social success, Siné quipped, “He’ll go a long way in life, that little lad.”
It didn’t take long for Claude Askolovitch, a high-profile political journalist, to accuse Siné of anti-Semitism. Charlie Hebdo‘s editor, Philippe Val, who re-published Jyllands-Posten’s controversial cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in the name of ‘freedom of press’ in 2006, agreed that the piece was offensive and asked Siné to apologize. Siné refused, saying, “I’d rather cut my balls off.” He was fired and taken to court by the Ligue Internationale Contre le Racisme et l’Antisémitisme (LICRA), an organization which works to promote racial tolerance. In December 2010, Siné won a €40,000 court judgment against his former publisher for wrongful termination.
Charlie Hebdo publishes cartoons insulting Islam and Muslims as well as Jesus and Christianity, and tags them as “freedom of speech.” However, in the case of Siné, it failed to stand firm on its provocative “freedom of speech” stance.
Carlos Latuff, a world renowned Brazilian cartoonist, told Daily Sabah, “It is an everlasting discussion, because what is freedom of speech and what is hate speech? Why are some subjects protected by freedom of speech and others not? Why can we mock some issues and cannot do so with others? Should Holocaust denial, for example, be included as freedom of speech, or racial hatred? See, for example, the treatment given by the Western mainstream media to Muhammad cartoons and the Holocaust cartoons.”
Latuff added that the motive behind the urge to mock Islam remains unknown. “Who knows? Hatred against Muslims, testing the limits of freedom of speech, mocking Muslims just for fun, who knows? However, the fact is that they [Charlie Hebdo editors] died not for a good cause, what could be seen as noble, but for provoking Muslims and feeding the hatred against Islam.”
These are some of Latuff’s cartoons that speak a thousand words:
Wikileaks, on January 8, blamed the persecution of Siné (at the request of a Jewish “pro-censorship” lobby) for legitimizing the terrorist attacks on Charlie Hebdo.
How the Jewish pro-censorship lobby legitimized attacks on Charlie Hebdo for “offensive” speech http://t.co/6Ts6rWgw7p #CharlieHebdo
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 8, 2015
The American Jewish Committee reprimanded key media outlets in the UK and US, including the London Daily Telegraph, The New York Times, CNN, and NBC for omitting and blurring many cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo that motivated Muslims to attack the magazine.
“Through this act of self-censorship, these news organizations are depriving the public of its right to know exactly what Charlie Hebdo had done to arouse the ire of the jihadists,” said AJC Executive Director David Harris. “Keeping this information from the public not only betrays the canons of free journalism, but also furthers the goal of the killers and their sympathizers: to create an atmosphere of fear where freedom of expression is limited and make Islam, alone among all other world religions and secular ideologies, immune from public criticism.”
US comic book artist, Art Spiegelman, also denounced the hypocrisy of the US press for declining to republish the Charlie Hebdo cartoons. The creator of Maus, a graphic novel about the Holocaust, said, “I think it’s so hypocritical to drape yourself in freedom of speech and then self-censor yourself to the point where you are not making your readers understand the issues.”
“We have a standard that is long held and that serves us well: that there is a line between gratuitous insult and satire. Most of these are gratuitous insult,” said Dean Baquet, executive editor of The New York Times, defending the decision to not publish the cartoons.
Dean’s response, however, failed to cool Spiegelman down. “When religion overlaps with social and political issues, it’s necessary to fight back, so Charlie is equally hard on Jews including anti-Semitic caricatures and quotes when talking about Israel. The equal opportunity insult that came with Charlie Hebdo was the reason it’s estimable,” he added.
In an open letter to Le Monde in July 2008, 20 writers and politicians including: Paris Mayor, Bertrand Delanoe; Nobel Peace Prize-winner, Elie Wiesel; filmmaker, Claude Lanzmann; French Culture Minister, Christine Albanel; former Justice Minister, Robert Badinter; and philosopher, Bernard-Henri Levy defended Charlie Hebdo’s firing of Siné. They argued that, “once again, once too often Siné had crossed the line between humor and insult, caricature and hatred.”
However, what they failed to see was that Charlie was demanding “freedom to criticize” Islam but was repressing criticism of Judaism – the reason Siné was canned. Take a look at the below cartoons, and try to answer objectively: Are Charlie Hebdo and ‘freedom of speech’ really synonymous?
Related Articles:
Muslim Mayor of Rotterdam Tells Radical Islamists To F*** Off On Live TV
French Website Gets Tim Cook Approve Je Suis Charlie App In One Hour
JK Rowling’s Tweet Shuts Down Rupert Murdoch’s Anti-Muslim Rhetoric
10 Things The Media Won’t Be Talking About After The Paris Terror Attack
Anti-Muslim Attacks After The Charlie Hebdo Massacre
Catholic League Defends Murders at Charlie Hebdo
#CharlieHebdo – Muslim Woman Apologises To The World In The Name Of Muslims
#JESUISAHMED|Story Of The French Police Officer Who Was Gunned Down While Saving Charlie Hebdo
Muslim Activist Tweets What’s Most Offensive About The Paris Shooting
Here’s How Arab Newspapers Reacted to The #CharlieHebdo Massacre
#CharlieHebdo Shooting Suspect #MouradHamydInnocent? Classmates Defend The Teenager on Twitter
Terrorists’ Slaughter of French Journalists Boosts Europe’s Racist Far-Right
US Politicians Take Advantage of France Terror Attack to Call for More NSA Spying
Paris Unity March | More Than 3.7 Million Attended
The Muslim Heroes of the Paris Terror Attacks
___________________________________________________________________________
References:
http://www.worldbulletin.net/news/152585/charlie-hebdo-fired-cartoonist-for-anti-semitism-in-2009
http://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/09/solidarity-charlie-hebdo-cartoons/
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2015/01/some-charlie-hebdo-cartoons-that-are.html#.VLPh7dKUcoY
http://gawker.com/what-is-charlie-hebdo-and-why-a-mostly-complete-histo-1677959168
sigh
SHALOM ALEICHEM jewish
SHELAM ALEIKUM Muslim
same shit….just like orthodox and catholic church
“Charlie Hebdo mocks the prophet Muhammad through insulting cartoons and calls it satire. As a result, half of the magazine’s staff is wiped out by terrorists in the name of Allah.”
You wrote it so that, like this kind of thing is normal.. As a result they are killed..
I started to think that you are really biased and afraid of rocking the boat. Are you afraid of religions Annonhq? Or are you afraid of believers?
Organized Religions were always violent, they are the problem. Instead of going against the true problem, these kind of articles just confuses the public.
Brother, you are mistaken, he has printed the whole article properly. Look at it from entirety and you would agree.
What will you do when Islamic media draw a cartoon of jesus and pop?
same as I have always done. laugh at them and see the truth behind the shocking cartoon.
Your mistaken my friend, Muslim’s follow the example of Jesus (Peace and blessings be up on him) more than they follow the example of Muhammad (peace and blessings be up on him). A true Muslim would never insult or make fun of Jesus (PABBUOH) because he is indeed among the greatest prophet’s of all time. (all messengers of God are great)
Thanks for this comment. ORGANIZED religions are the one true problem.
Articles like this just confuse people who don’t want to see the truth. Simplistic people always choose the easiest option: religion is the source of any violence in the world……all the powerful kingdoms and civilizations that have ever existed on this planet were made and built by believers. Man has always believed in that powerful God that always help and support him in his existence. Living a life without religion or strong beliefs just lead people to dispair. Living a materialistic life with no spirituality satisfies our body, but how about our soul?
But that’s not the point in this article. The article is about the west hypocrisy. In the name of freedom of speech, we fire a journalist and condemn a whole religion. In the first case, it’s because too much was said about the Jews and in the second one we call all the planet to protest against these people we insult and mock day and night without any respect to their values and beliefs. What kind of world we are living in?
Well it was never the religion itself that made the world so violent. But ignorant people and their mistaken interpretations are. So blame it on the people.
Regarding Sine, well it’s all based on facts, don’t close your eyes for that please..
Religion is not the problem. A radical view of any kind is. Stalin and Hitler were not particularly religious people. Having said so, I think nevertheless that is far worse a person with no religious or political creed that causes war pursuing economic benefit than a person who goes to war in the name of his or her beliefs.
Below is a link to a good article which rebukes some of the things said in this moronic one.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2015/01/charlie-hebdo-has-a-right-to-offend-you-and-it-is-not-a-double-standard/
Ali Malik Gurbuz: You’re a liar. It is those Right-wingers of European descent, specifically theJews, who are the real violent ones. Israel did 9/11.
Junis, all 9/11 participants were Saudi Arabian. All three major world religions come from one, only one source. Abraham. He married his sister and she bore Isaac. Christian Jews over took and destroyed the Roman and Greek empires and religions. A violent sect of the Christians became the Catholic Church. Medieval Times, Spanish Inquisition, sending envoys out by sea to overtake new lands already inhabited by other cultures, etc. Every religious book, Bible, Torah, Qur’an, are all very violent and condone their violence in the name of showing worship to their own form of god. All of these books were written (and heavily edited) by human men thousands of years ago, with no updates, as if their gods no longer exist to provide new information every few hundred years or so. Humans would be better off blaming everything on invisible guidance, and do much better if we realized we’re on this planet together, let each other believe what they want without criticizing, blaming, or feeling superior to others not like themselves. It just might work.
Actually, no, the “highjackers” were not Saudis. Those passports were stolen. About 8 of the supposed suicide highjackers were found to be alive and thousands of miles away at the time of the attack…most at their everyday, normal jobs. With no terrorism ties. This was done by an entity that has been caught stealing passports in the past. Need I say any MO?
You are right about the bible and torah being mabipulated. But you see what one human can produce another human can. The quran you say was written by man. See at the time of the prophet arabia was just sand camels and dates. Non of the superpowers took over it because there wss basically nothing to controll. This is just to show that the arabic language isnt a contaminated language like english for example. The onlything the people of arabia were the best at was poetry and literature. The quraish (idol worshipers) called Muhammad PBUH a poet. But the poers refuted this saying theyve never seen anything like it. Now remember what one human being csn produce another can. There is a challenge in the quran addressing the whole of mankind. To produce one chapter like it, (the shortest being three sentences). Its been over 1400 years and not a single person has done this.Therefore it has not been written/said (because it is a speech) by humans
what goes with sandy beaches stays there with northern woods stays there. gods are local but humans drag them all over. buddhism is good. gods hover outside where ever but the “thing” is your inside. so more of the latter.
Cartoons of the Holocaust are hardly the same as mocking a man or a prophet. Firstly, many would say there is no evidence that Mohammad existed and they could make that claim without being considered anti-Islam. I don’t know how you could do the same about the Holocaust without being anti-Semitic. The evidence the holocaust happened is greater and more overwhelming than the evidence Mohammad ever existed. 6 million people were murdered for their faith/ethnicity…that’s an event pretty hard to satire. Famous and infamous individuals are lot easier especially one who makes – according to many – grandiose claims. So, I can clearly see a difference. Mocking the prophet Mohammad (pbuh) is not a good idea in my opinion, but it’s not racist. Insinuating Jews love money etc is a well known racist stereotype of Jews. So therefore it is racist. Racist stereotypes of Muslims should be treated the same way if they come up, not tolerated. Cartoons ridiculing Mohammad is not racist.
excellent point, I thought this crew stood for freedom of speech instead this article sounds more like it was wrote in fear of retaliation!.
I think this shit is simple We won’t go to their country and piss on their parade they should respect us in kind, I dislike religions for obvious reasons even more so now, this type of shit that just happened is starting to make me seriously dislike their mindless followers as well.
They say they are offended by a cartoon because it poked fun at their belief’s, well I’m offended and seriously pissed off that they just offended my belief and went so far as to sodomize it in front of my eyes, I speak of Freedom of speech in my own country, who the f**k do they think they are! How f**king dare they preach that shit to me on my own soil, well f**k them and their poxy belief’s, I had sympathy for what the west is doing in these country’s but whatever sympathy I had has now long gone.
The only people who aren’t scared of religion in this day and age are those who are deluded enough to think they will be rewarded in the afterlife.
A great article. Charlie intentionally provokes and baits the Muslims. The cartoons aren’t humor, but propaganda, which suits the Jewish community to a t.
People talk about pluralism, but unification is the answer. Some religions look on their own shortcomings as positive attributes. Pardon my inflammatory statement. Here in America we call ourselves a ‘melting pot’ and we strive to not just tolerate, but really like one another.
The cartoons are a display of racial hatred, and that should be a crime.
Moderate Muslims in Chicago are trying to hold their heads high, while being aware of the pressure the one-sided media has placed on them.
Lastly, the idea that Mohammed would immediately forgive the murderers is obnoxious. These people never stop, and the world media condones their actions. There is fault on both sides.
Fault on both sides? Murder vs satire?
These people defend not one religion but the right to not believe at all. Actually reading the journal would be a good idea before spreading your biased opinion. You would not stand for 1/10 of their progressive ideas.
False Flag ! But you know that already don’t you.
http://www.elplural.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/charlie-hebdo.jpg
This is not insulting ? I do not understand your logic . Aca make fun of Christianity , but the intent is the same
It is the religion of their ancestors, the religion they have been raised under. In earlier history, order was maintained through religion. In order to keep order punishments had to be harsh.
All this makes sense if it only applies to the people in a specific region (like a town or city). If an individual wants not to conform, he can move away. The trouble begins when overzealous believers try to force Sharia law on others, in areas distant. That is what has happened. The extremist have come to believe so strongly in their religion that they travel about enforcing it with the strictest punishments.
I maintain that both the Muslims, and the folks at Charlie Hebdo are at fault. Again, it is one thing to poke fun at groups; another thing to bait them into responding.
What did the Hebdo people expect? As the article says, they fire people for anti-Semitic statements, but they are jovial in their support when the poor primitive Muslims are the target.
Education might eventually bring all the Muslims into a 21st century attitude, but that may take time. Until we can reach all of them, we should anticipate revenge for perceived evils.
Primitive? ahahahah wow.You cannot blame a whole religion just because some of those who did something very upsetting to your culture.That is a very idiotic and “primitive” thinking.How can you blame lets say a whole country because some person who happens to be a citizen of that country massacred 40 people.Is it fair if we condemn that country because of one man’s doing.Be rational. Muslims were never taught to kill people muslims or not. But they have to defend their religion when they are mocked. That is what they are taught, and by defending I do not mean killing.
The ISIS are not real muslims they are manipulated by false ideology and they kill innocent men,women and children AND MUSLIMS who do not like or follow what they do.The appropriate thing to do is to NOT further condemn the religion.The result will only be in the extremists favor because more infuriated muslims will join them which will result more killing and hatred. Which can cause chaos and probably war.
Education is one out of many priorities in the religion. Do not be so ignorant.Many muslims are highly educated since thousands of years ago. Do not lecture people about “Primitive” your culture is corrupting youths around the world and is the main cause of unbelievable stupidity in humanity.What they should have done was apologize. Even speech has to have limits. For example you can not just simply call a person’s mother a whore without thinking the consequences of your action.
John Lake, replace every reference to Islam and Muslims with
Christianity and it’s the exact same story plotline with the same characters. The US has our own version of ISIS, they’re called the rightwing Evangelicals and politically they’re the GOP tea party, and American Patriots.
sorry, I left out the KKK, White Supremists,
dooms day preppers, religious cults (not all the Mormons are cultish), and that crazy rancher guy in Nevada.
jemwerica actually ran by terrorist jews. nice try parasite.
” Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.” Joel STEIN of the LA times
“Who runs Hollywood? C’mon”
December 19, 2008 “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” – Joel Stein LA times
“Jews do control the media” – Israel Times July 1st 2012
“The Chinese Believe That the Jews Control America. Is That a Good Thing?” – Tablet March 27 2014
“Ashkenazi Jews are not white” -The times of Israel DECEMBER 5, 2014
“Media Control: Top Jewish Supremacist Takes over Britain’s Guardian Newspaper” -David Duke dotty com
TYT
2 jews one turk.
Creator(s) Cenk Uygur[1]
Ben Mankiewicz[2]
Dave Koller[2]
Google/youtube= 2 jews
Facebook=Faceberg
This is a confusing article, and not so correct (imo).
But the cartoon that he made isn’t displayed here.
You have to be able to laugh (or just ignore it) with cartoons, no matter what religion or any other subject it is about.
It always has a deeper (non-offending) meaning with you can only express by sending it through “shocking” media.
But you can not laugh with the massacre with was intended for a WHOLE community (along with other minorities).
The big difference why you can’t laugh with the holocaust is actually a law to honour and respect every last person who died awfully during the holocaust.
If the cartoon was really directly holocaust related then the cartoonist was wrong.
If it was only AND ONLY about the stereotype of jews with all the money then Charlie would have been wrong.
And besides that i doubt any Jewish extremists were planning an attack on the writer of the cartoon, when we look in the contrary the muslim extremists DID do this.
That’s what’s wrong, they could mock our society through other media but they didn’t and just let their anger drive them to kill (in the name of their ‘so’ holy god.)
It takes a man to address something you think is wrong in the world WITHOUT violence.
Stuff to think about
Reply to Ano:
“You have to be able to laugh (or just ignore it) with cartoons, no matter what religion or any other subject, it is about.” MYSELF, I ONLY LAUGH IF IT’S FUNNY AND MAKES A POINT ONE MIGHT NOT HAVE THOUGHT OF.
“It always has a deeper (non-offending) meaning with you can only express by sending it through ‘shocking’ media.” WELL IT CLEARLY DOESN’T ALWAYS HAVE A NON-OFFENDING MEANING/JUSTIFICATION.
“If it was only and only about the stereotype of Jews with all the money, then Charlie would have been wrong.” OPPOSITE-A-MUNDO. GREEDY JEW DEPICTIONS ARE FUNNY AND HAVE A POINT. AS I WROTE SOMEWHERE EARLIER, SOME RELIGIONS SEE THEIR SHORTCOMINGS AS POSITIVE ATTRIBUTES. (Don’t get me wrong, sometimes I concede Jews might really be superior. Also Orientals, Poles, Italians… In fact if you have a philosopher in you, you might concede that at some future time the world will note that the Africans are superior. Because brighter isn’t an absolute determinate of superiority. African people, like African elephants, tigers, orchids.., are larger stronger, less sensitive, thus more apt to thrive. Think about it.)
Bottom line: If you push a moral and tolerant man hard enough and far enough, you are going to get hit.
African Tigers? I use this as a gauge of intelligence…..
As I read the article CHARLIE HEBDO FIRED ‘ANTI-SEMITIC’ CARTOONIST FOR RIDICULING JUDAISM IN 2009, the cartoonist who was fired was not fired for a cartoon, rather a statement (a quip). The author of the ANONYMOUS article above states that:
“Maurice Sinet, known to the world as Siné, faced charges of “inciting racial hatred” for a column he wrote in July 2009. “L’affaire Sine,” followed the engagement of Jean Sarkozy to Jessica Sebaoun-Darty, the Jewish heiress of a major consumer electronics company, the Darty Group. Commenting on rumours that Jean intended to convert from Catholicism to Judaism (Jessica’s religion) for social success, Siné quipped, “He’ll go a long way in life, that little lad.
“It didn’t take long for Claude Askolovitch, a high-profile political journalist, to accuse Siné of anti-Semitism. Charlie Hebdo‘s editor, Philippe Val, who re-published Jyllands-Posten’s controversial cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in the name of ‘freedom of press’ in 2006, agreed that the piece was offensive and asked Siné to apologize. Siné refused, saying, “I’d rather cut my balls off.” He was fired and taken to court by the Ligue Internationale Contre le Racisme et l’Antisémitisme (LICRA), an organization which works to promote racial tolerance. In December 2010, Siné won a €40,000 court judgment against his former publisher for wrongful termination.”
You know. im not for religion or politics. i could live as a Bohemian [bəʊˈhiːmɪən/ a socially unconventional person, especially one who is involved in the arts. ]
but i never heard a jew killing for the same reasons or in the same ways as a muslim. I know christians did it in the “crusader-era”. but you know. Most (not all) muslims are extreme. In that way if we define extreme, and compare it to other religions. An extreme buddhist does not kill (again, define . Or am i wrong?
Killing should not be a thing in 2015. 1415 maybe, but not now.
In a last note, free speech always gets someone offended.
Here is a simplified overview of violence in buddhism- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence
want to learn more? google is your friend.
I can help you with another wiki page here- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism_and_violence
I am not defending the terrorists here (if there is hell, they are gonna burn in the darkest one), just saying before taking a side know everything about your choice.
Do you know why you think that most Muslims are extremists? It’s just because you decided so. How many Muslims do you know to judge them all? You decided to believe what’s said I the media and this the simplest way to make an opinion. When the media always focuses on the extreme Muslims ( and we know that extremists exist in all ideologies), you’ll always think that this is the bad reality about these people. And when the media decides to hide all the crimes happening in the world committed by the west or by Israel such as bombarding Palestinian kids playing in the beach or taking by force things that don’t belong to them, you’ll never say that this terrorism. Just look around you and try to know those Muslims you are condemning and you’ll find out that they are just ordinary people like you and me.
You think it may have to do with the support – as revealed by scientific polls – for Al Qaida and Osama bin Laden following 9/11? For example, 59% support in Indonesia (far from the Arab-Israeli conflict). It’s true that it has dropped over the last decade, down to about 1 in 4, but isn’t that still extreme?
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2010/12/2010-muslim-01-07.png
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2010/12/2010-muslim-01-13.png
What are we to think when demonstrations over cartoons in obscure papers thousands of miles away attract scores of thousands of Muslim protesters, often violent, yet a protest in Detroit against the underwear bomber (who attempted to blow up a flight to Detroit, on which people, relatives and friends could have been on) only attracted maybe 20 people?
Perhaps people look at what the majority of Muslims say/support, if not do themselves, when forming their opinions?
For example, after 9/11, Al Qaida and Osama bin Laden had 59% support in Indonesia (far from the Arab-Israeli conflict).
In the decade since that’s dropped to “only” about 1 in 4, but isn’t that still way too high and not something that can be regarded as the lunatic “fringe”?
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2010/12/2010-muslim-01-07.png
Then there’s this:
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2010/12/2010-muslim-01-13.png
Consider further that demonstrations over cartoons in obscure newspapers thousands of miles away draw scores of thousands of protesters (including violence, destruction and murder of innocents), while a demonstration in Detroit against the underwear bomber (who tried to blow up a flight to Detroit, on which people, relatives and friends could have been) drew about 20 protesters.
Are you watching T.V, reading newspaper or books about what Jews is doing to Palestinian people from 70 Years ?
did you see the children that were killed in the last war on Gaza on Palestine ? they killed more than 2500 and just for your information most of them were from Women and children, that’s not Extreme ?! that’s not terrorism ?!
Artist have both brain and heart to search for the truth not just take it from media or from anyone , even in choosing religion we have to read and search to know the truth, we are in this world for a reason.
best regards
In reality, the casualties in Gaza last summer were 1,767 (not 2,500) and of these 431 were minors and 200 were women. These demographic segments account for about 75% of the population, yet only 36% of (not “most of”) the casualties. Normally in such urban warfare civilians account for about 80% of casualties.
Consider further that the above includes Gazans killed by errant Hamas rockets (how come faux “humanitarians” only complain when errant Israeli shells strike civilians?) and casualties from secondary explosions (e.g. when rockets are stored in a school or apartment building).
Similarly the faux “humanitarians” never complain that Hamas and its ilk fire their rockets not only at Israeli civilians but from behind scores of thousands of Gazans. They only screech when Israel fires back and some civilians are killed – as everyone, including the Hamas terrorists, knows?
If they must fire rockets (why? has this accomplished anything whatsoever other than getting their own people killed?), why don’t they do it from open areas? Not only are these closer to Israel (so they could more reliably fire at their targets, and also deeper into Israel) but it would also eliminate the possibility of errant Hamas rockets falling in Gaza and killing Gazans.
I suppose you also believe that Israeli bombs are so intelligent that they only hit male Palestinians between 18 and 55 and anybody else that gets killed is killed by other Palestinians.
Thank you, marbou, for proving my point about faux “humanitarians”.
Setting aside your straw man (“only”), I leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out why the majority of casualties from IDF fire are (contrary to the propaganda lie) males of fighting age. (And nowhere near a demographic cross section of the population, which would be expected in the event of random or indiscriminate bombing).
I have always wondered why other Middle Eastern countries have not seriously taken up finding a solution in Palestine…is it because the Palestinian people are useful pawns?
And there’s the 1972 Olympic massacre that happened in Germany.
point to add in that war Jews also killed 17 journalists who were only doing their job , is that freedom of speech ?
proof please. Deliberately shot and targeteted them because they were journalists?
Yes, deliberately targeted them.
I was thinking the same. Plus the cartoonist don’t mock Judaism or prophets from the Old Testament but reinforcing racist stereotypes about Jewish people (whether they are extreme left liberal atheist like one of Charlie Hebdo victims or wether they are an ultra orthodox)
I am surprised no one but you saw it!
Charlie Hebdo did not spare Judaism …little bit of effort on Google and you find CH cartoons making circomcession, hlocaust and cartoons portraying Israel in unflattering light.
Despite Sine’s racist cartoons I am sure no jew threatened, burned or killed him while another jew went to a Muslim deli killing additional 4 people.
Many like me sad the real face of the left …fascistic like anonymous only damage the left ….and pushing many like me away
I bet this comment would be screened …proof anonymous are fascists
Very good points, Erean. Siné was not fired because he attacked “Judaism” (as the cartoon above falsely claims). Charlie Hebdo had routinely poked fun at Judaism as it did other religions. The objections to the cartoon was its foundation on racial stereotypes – more the domain of Der Stürmer.
Nore was Siné’s firing a violation of free speech. Not only wasn’t he attacked or murdered over this, no one said he can’t publish his Anti-Semitic (racist) cartoons elsewhere. There is no “Western” hypocrisy here, and claiming such only reveals a complete misunderstanding of the principle.
thank you!
Jews didn’t kill him, but they had him fired. That’s really not much better – to destroy someone’s life and livelihood because they are “offended.”
“Jews… had him fired”?
Which is “not much better” than murdering him?
Is it any wonder that the person who can’t see the difference between losing a job (after publishing a racist cartoon and refusing to apologize for it) and being murdered in cold blood… also speaks of “Jews” as monolithic?
Yeah ?? Is it ? Over 5000 people were killed and more than half of them were innocent children in Palestine…it was for what ??
Anders, Sectarian violence is common in the Buddhist communities. They will kill Buddhists from other sects who don’t believe the same as the killers do, they kill Christians, and Muslims. All without provocation. You are not only wrong, you are extremely wrong. free speech doesn’t always offend, but stupidity does. And WTF does “I know Christians did it in the “crusader-era”. but you know.” mean.
as for calling yourself “Bohemian” you have absolutely no education other than the artsy fartsy group that misused the world in the West around the 1950’s – 1960’s.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/71528/Bohemia it’s a religion too.
how many countries are the jews who own jewmerica and israel and europe bombing? Fr 4000 years it has been written this racial suprmacist organization of judisim has done this. NOw we have proof.
” Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.” Joel STEIN of the LA times
“Who runs Hollywood? C’mon”
December 19, 2008 “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” – Joel Stein LA times
“Jews do control the media” – Israel Times July 1st 2012
“The Chinese Believe That the Jews Control America. Is That a Good Thing?” – Tablet March 27 2014
“Ashkenazi Jews are not white” -The times of Israel DECEMBER 5, 2014
“Media Control: Top Jewish Supremacist Takes over Britain’s Guardian Newspaper” -David Duke dotty com
TYT
2 jews one turk.
Creator(s) Cenk Uygur[1]
Ben Mankiewicz[2]
Dave Koller[2]
Google/youtube= 2 jews
Facebook=Faceberg
The Crusades were DEFENSIVE wars against Islam, which had warred its way all over the Middle East and as far North as to get into Tours, France, man. Educate yourself.
thanks anonymous for your comprehension
i love you anonymous why
because You say the truth
i’m muslim and proud
Do not judge something even get to know him.
Sorry I do not know much English, but I made an effort
Being sorry for the dead may become reason for society to confuse propaganda with pure truth. If we think that one side is bad, we should not assume the other to be perfect. I am truly sorry for those lost lives and for sure I’m against terrorism. But I’m against censorship too.
Thank you for an amazing article.
Should we be sorry for the dead? We, I’m sure feel the pain of the remaining loved ones.
thanks anonymous for your comprehension
i love you anonymous why
because You say the truth
i’m muslim and proud
Do not judge something even get to know him.
Sorry I do not know much English, but I made an effort
*sighs* Dear lord, it’s the 2nd week of the New Year and we’ve already had ANOTHER problem already, first the ISIS hacking, and now more about the ugly truth about Charlie Hedbdo and the Paris attack. God, help us all.
je vous remercie pour cette bonne article qui va tirer l’affaire au clair malheuereusement on arrive a utuliser la lbierté d’expression d’une mauvaise maniére on arrive a insulter les gens au nom de la liberté d’expression on arrive a toucher la dignité des gens au nom de la liberté d’expression et ca c’est vraimment trés grave parceque on courage les gens qui s’expriment au nom de la liberté d’expression à tuer les valeurs de la tolerance ,du symbiose et meme de l’humanité et suremment ce qui va nous donner dans un certain temps une generation pleine de la haine et de racisme alors j’espere que tout le monde commence dés maintenant à calmer le jeu et de dire que le monde ca va pas !!!! et de faire les choses d’une facon assez juste et de laisser les actes de racisme à part et de résoudre nos problemes au nom de l’humanité ni moins ni plus Merci .// Ancien Anonymous //
Merci super article . je tiens à rappelé que je journal Charlie Hebdo a aussi critiqué les chrétien. L’autre attentat porte de vincenne a Paris quelque jours après est aussi scandaleux que celui de Charlie hebdo. Je pense que les juif se sentent trop touchée. Nous somme tous autant affecté par cette attentas. Il n’y a aucun livre religieux dit de tué son prochain.
je vous remercie pour cette bonne article qui va tirer l’affaire au clair malheuereusement on arrive a utuliser la lbierté d’expression d’une mauvaise maniére on arrive a insulter les gens au nom de la liberté d’expression on arrive a toucher la dignité des gens au nom de la liberté d’expression et ca c’est vraimment trés grave parceque on courage les gens qui s’expriment au nom de la liberté d’expression à tuer les valeurs de la tolerance ,du symbiose et meme de l’humanité et suremment ce qui va nous donner dans un certain temps une generation pleine de la haine et de racisme alors j’espere que tout le monde commence dés maintenant à calmer le jeu et de dire que le monde ca va pas !!!! et de faire les choses d’une facon assez juste et de laisser les actes de racisme à part et de résoudre nos problemes au nom de l’humanité ni moins ni plus Merci .// Ancien Anonymous // share plz
un liking anonymous. after the latest posts I’ve realised that anonymous has a bias. I Liked anonymous because I thought it supported freedom of speech free of opinionated stories. The fact is most of this BS is aimed at converting idiots into replicating your views. The truth is there are no good guys. if it was made by a human, 99% of the time the writer’s own opinion reflects in what they write. So either anonymous is a load of crap or they are hiring the wrong writers. I’m disappointed.
burn in hell jew. Im keeping the fire hot.
Simplistic people always choose the easiest option: religion is the source of any violence in the world……all the powerful kingdoms and civilizations that have ever existed on this planet were made and built by believers. Man has always believed in that powerful God that always help and support him in his existence. Living a life without religion or strong beliefs just lead people to dispair. Living a materialistic life with no spirituality satisfies our body, but how about our soul?
But that’s not the point in this article. The article is about the west hypocrisy. In the name of freedom of speech, we fire a journalist and condemn a whole religion. In the first case, it’s because too much was said about the Jews and in the second one we call all the planet to protest against these people we insult and mock day and night without any respect to their values and beliefs. What kind of world we are living in?
Le pouvoir, les possessions, les religions sont le cancer de l’humanité. On est pas sorti d’affaire.. Bonne chance, Anonymous 🙂
“La terrible vérité est qu’il suffit d’un simple tueur pour abattre un journaliste mais qu’il faut une Nation entière pour assassiner un droit.”
Jonathan Turley.
“Un peuple prêt à sacrifier un peu de liberté pour un peu de sécurité ne mérite ni l’une ni l’autre, et finit par perdre les deux.”
Benjamin Franklin.
merci!
Thank you for the article. It validated what I already know, that there is a double standard when it comes to freedom of speech. It’s freedom of speech when talking about Muslims and other groups but anti-semitic when talking about jews. What I don’t get is why anonymous doesn’t bring this out in the open and expose the hypocrisy. The article is great however it’s preaching to the choir, it needs to be exposed on a greater level so that no one can deny it or hide behind those ridiculous je suis charlie signs. Why doesn’t anonymous hack into the elite who propagate the double standards and reveal their agenda. Why not make videos that disclose the truth behind the so called free speech rhetoric? Anonymous, this is why wars start and the war drums are beating because what is really happening is a climate that will have the masses condoning a war against the muslim states. As you can see, millions marched in solidarity against the attacks in france, everyone is being fed crap to justify a world war. Maybe if the masses could really see what was going on they’d march with signs saying “je ne suis pas charlie.”
Interesting but not equivalent to murder. Watch that false equivocation.
Je Suis Charlie
So you its not limitation of freedom of speech unless you kill the guy? what’s your point?
yes, murder is not equivalent of trying to kill someone’s career. This fact could make anyone suicidal and we have whole bunch of stories that had lethal end.
On the other hand, if those terrorists where taken down before killing those innocent people, would it make the issue less tragic?
good job jew. as long as the goyim slave is only fired and has no money to feed his family he can still get a job to be your slave right? dead= not as good a slave for the parasite
The inference that to get on you have to get in with the Jews cos they have all the money is actually a standard anti semitic trope. Now, if Charlie Hebdo have said all Muuslims are terrorists than that would be equivalent and equally to hate mongering. Failure to understand this is failure ot understand the natureo anti semisitsm. It is different to islamophobia in character and likewise different to anti black hatred. This does actually seem anti semitic to me. SHouldhe have been prosecuted for that? No. Should he have been sacked by his editors? Maybe. It’s up to them,as were all their legal decisions. However, no Jews stormed their offices and gunned them down, you’ll notice. See the difference?
no they just took over all white nations and in jewmerica the blacks are raping and setting on fire white women and children because they are the jews soldiers used to take over our nations.
” Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.” Joel STEIN of the LA times
“Who runs Hollywood? C’mon”
December 19, 2008 “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” – Joel Stein LA times
“Jews do control the media” – Israel Times July 1st 2012
“The Chinese Believe That the Jews Control America. Is That a Good Thing?” – Tablet March 27 2014
“Ashkenazi Jews are not white” -The times of Israel DECEMBER 5, 2014
“Media Control: Top Jewish Supremacist Takes over Britain’s Guardian Newspaper” -David Duke dotty com
TYT
2 jews one turk.
Creator(s) Cenk Uygur[1]
Ben Mankiewicz[2]
Dave Koller[2]
Google/youtube= 2 jews
Facebook=Faceberg
Philippe Val (the editor at the time) is the one who decided that Siné should be fired.
Since then, as you can see above, there have been loads of drawings taking the piss out of jews and Judaism.
He was no longer in place at the time of the attack of the 07/01/2015.
Charlie Hebdo has always mocked religions, ALL religions.
This writer misses the point. Jews are a minority that are persecuted against. Many Arab countries are focused on the destruction of the Jewish State. Muslims are not a minority and Muslim terrorists will use any excuse to murder Jews. Jewish satires merely provide fuel to an already burning fire. Muslim satire demonstrates that the Muslim terrorists will find any reason to kill. When Jews have a problem, we sue, we write letters, we use ink, not bullets. That is a main difference. Shame on this writer for grouping a persecuted minority with a major religion that is riddled with terrorists with bullets.
Zionists kill woman & children, non Zionist jews have lived with muslims side by side with no conflicts. conflict started when the zionist started ethnic cleansing in Palestine. orthodox jews need to speak out, for those who remain silent shows support for the zionist butchers. I WILL ALWAYS ADVOCATE PEACE & not war.
What do “Zionists” have to do with the discussion in the first place?
Jews in Arab/Muslim countries were every bit as persecuted (officially relegated to dhimmi status, frequently not even citizens) as Jews in the European/Christian world (with the exception of the Holocaust, which is oddly denied by many Arabs/Muslims). This is why we always hear the same handful of “examples” – across 1300 years and a vast empire. Those are exceptions, and they often ended poorly, e.g. the massacre of thousands of Jews in Granada in 1066).
Similarly, anti-Jewish violence in Mandate Palestine (and before) long predated any “ethnic cleansing” in 1948 (after Arab parties launched a war to “throw the Jews into the sea”, “a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres”. Indeed, testifying at the UN, a leader of the Arab Higher Committee (which represented the Arabs of Mandate Palestine who were not yet known as Palestinians at the time) said (2 months before Deir Yassin): “The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world we were going to fight.”
global jewery= take over the world (to take over israel) zionist= take over israel (to take over the world) the homeless race of jews are a parasite. the name was earned for a reason. AND YOU! are clearly one of them, so get off these sites. go bac to jewtalk or listen to some jewhollywood music like justin beibler or miley cyrus
I’m glad the moderators didn’t censor the above.
Now everyone can see how Anti-Semitism and racism run rampant in some people.
Jews in turn persecute the minorities in their own nation. And either way, they are not above any other group and do not deserve special treatment over any other human being. I realize you think so b/c you were taught to believe you are “chosen” or “special”. But you are not.
lol they dont have “their own nation’ its why they run all white nations and palestine wants them gone.
Except that Jews don’t consider themselves “chosen” or “special”, that’s just another Anti-Semitic stereotype. As already noted on this page, Jews believe they have to follow Mosaic law, which is a burden that confers no superiority or privilege.
Consider that while other nations have myths of descending from kings or even gods, Jews trace their ancestry to slaves. Where other religions teach that non-believers will be doomed to eternal damnation in Hell, that only their co-religionist believers will make it to Heaven, Judaism does no such thing.
Neither are minorities in Israel “persecuted” by “Jews”. In fact, it’s pretty much the only country in the mideast that doesn’t, and it compares favorably with European countries, too.
Arabs in Israel, including Muslims and Christians, are full citizens with equal protection under the law. They (including women) not only vote but also form political parties and serve in the Knesset – including as ministers in the ruling government coalition. They also serve in the foreign office – including as ambassadors.
Israeli Arabs also serve on the High (supreme) Court. The only court in the region where a citizen can sue his government, live to tell about it, and win/lose the case based only on its legal merits.
Israeli Arabs even serve in the Israeli Defense Forces, protecting their country, and achieving ranks as high as Major General (e.g. the commanders of the Border Patrol and Home Front Command).
Once again we see how Anti-Zionism goes hand-in-hand with Anti-Semitism.
People don’t hate Jews because of Israel.
They hate Israel because they hate Jews.
Great, now the extreme left (anonymous) have something in common with the Neo Naies movement – both hate Jews …so much that they are willing to apologize for the islamofacist navies with head scarfs who killed 4 Jews for being jews on Friday
Evil apologists …
Those cartoons don’t moke Judaism or Old Testament prophets but – Jews
Jews are greedy
Jews are cheep
Jews are evil
Jews want to controll the world
I feel sorry for you
You are afraid of your own shadow ….
Thank you for saying what I was thinking. Since when is some anti-Semitic remark which insinuates there is some world wide Jewish conspiracy, or what, a comment on Judaism? I don’t even understand it. PS, there is no world wide Jewish conspiracy.
No worldwide jewish conspiracy? Who owns all the major movie studios, news outlets and banks? BTW, you wanna’ buy a bridge in the Sahara Desert?
Oh, but it’s okay to suggest that all Moslems are terrorists – to suggest that are all part of a conspiracy to “push jews into the sea” and “take over the world”, right? Of course – because you yourself were raised to be bigoted against all “infidels” (non-Jews). The hypocrisy is amazing.
Straw man. Who said all Muslims are terrorists?
To the contrary, above I pointed out there are Muslims in the IDF.
There is no “hypocrisy” here, only your hate.
“I have never been so upset by a poll in my life. Only 22% of Americans now believe “the movie and television industries are pretty much run by Jews,” down from nearly 50% in 1964. The Anti-Defamation League, which released the poll results last month, sees in these numbers a victory against stereotyping. Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.
“All they want is a central headquarters for their international world swindle. Endowed with its own sovern rights and removed from the intervention of other states. A haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks” – Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf 1924
” Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.” Joel STEIN of the LA times
“Who runs Hollywood? C’mon”
December 19, 2008 “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” – Joel Stein LA times
“Jews do control the media” – Israel Times July 1st 2012
“The Chinese Believe That the Jews Control America. Is That a Good Thing?” – Tablet March 27 2014
“Ashkenazi Jews are not white” -The times of Israel DECEMBER 5, 2014
“Media Control: Top Jewish Supremacist Takes over Britain’s Guardian Newspaper” -David Duke dotty com
TYT
2 jews one turk.
Creator(s) Cenk Uygur[1]
Ben Mankiewicz[2]
Dave Koller[2]
Google/youtube= 2 jews
Facebook=Faceberg
global jewery= take over the world (to take over israel) zionist= take over israel (to take over the world) the homeless race of jews are a parasite. the name was earned for a reason. AND YOU! are clearly one of them, so get off these sites. go bac to jewtalk or listen to some jewhollywood music like justin beibler or miley cyrus
i had sympathy for hebdo but after the latest cartoons set out to offend thousands for what 3 terrorist did is just a shame. so does it offend if i say “well done terrorists”. But we know the video footage of the policeman getting shot tells a different story. Finger prints of the CIA all over it. From history we know before america goes to war it must first demonize to get public support and while people are pointing fingers and attacking one another, the powers that be are busy plotting & killing. DON’T FALL FOR IT. the earth belongs to everyone & everyone has a right to live in peace
Hmm… you guys are not intelligent enough to see the difference?
Example- lets say the cartoon were to ridicule a Christian leader. Lets say a black Christian leader. If the cartoon would say that this leader was violent because he is black would be racist. If it would mock the many other things about Christianity that would be about critiquing a religion and its laws. So to ridicule Jewish religion is fine, theres is much to ridicule like every religion. But to say Jews are greedy is antisemitic. Remember Hitler tried to wipe out all the Jews not because of some aspect of the religion he didnt agree with. Islam isnt a race. If Charlie would mock Arabs, that would be different. Saying Jews are geedy is pure antisemitism. Making a joke about a rabbi who wont look at a woman, would be mocking the religion, which we all agree would be fine, and even important
Sorry but saying Jews are greedy doesnt ridicule Judaism. its antisemitic, not anti Jewish. there is a difference
hmm… there is a difference
Take a Black preacher. Saying he is violent based on his being black is racist, saying that his religion is ridiculous is healthy criticism.
We will never be truly free or equals until we can all make fun of each other equally with no one getting offended. I argue, it is as equally racist to tell a joke that is offensive as it is to take offense with a joke. IMO, if we are truly equals, and not racists or bigots, then we should all be able to joke to one another about one another and none of us get offended. Because, being racist, is to essentially seek to remove something from someone, it is an act of defamation. It is to humiliate them, take away their equality by making them feel inferior, derogate someone for a specific reason or another, ie race, religion, background, education, etc. So my point is, if you make a joke with the idea in mind of disparaging someone then yes, you are a racist or bigot, but if the joke is purely to convey laughter, then you have taken nothing from anyone, and only given them entertainment. This implies that joking about one’s race or religion, etc, is not the problem. It is the jokes that are specifically meant to be demeaning in nature that are the issue, and if we are truly equals and free, then we should all be able to joke about almost everything so long as we aren’t trying to demean one another in doing so and are actually just trying to be funny or entertaining. That is how I feel about it anyways.
You make a point that the motivation of the cartoonist, or joker, is a determining factor. If we say, “Jews are greedy!” we may be saying that if they were to belay their greed, we might come to like them better.
If we intentionally provoke and taunt the Muslims, we are not beginning to converse with them.
The fact remains, the extremists are an ongoing threat to the world which they see as being evil enough to warrant carnage and annihilation. They see themselves as being holy enough to carry out such annihilation. So we are going to war with them, and they don’t get it.
To be completely honest, you can’t really compare depictions of the prophet Mohammad to comics about The Holocaust. Granted, they’re each offensive to their respective religious group, but for vastly different reasons.
On one hand, Sharia Law forbids *any* depiction of the prophet Muhammad, even if it’s framed in a positive light. (On a side note, Christianity also forbids any graven images of god and Jesus in the second commandment, yet every Christian has pictures and statues of Jesus lining the walls of their homes.) On the other hand, The Holocaust was an orchestrated mass killing of millions of people.
The reason Holocaust jokes are universally offensive is because the ethnic cleansing was offensively universal. Beyond the six million Jews who were slaughtered like cattle, upwards of 20 million other non-Jewish people were also killed, including Communists, Socialists, Gypsies, members of the LGBT community, Jehovah’s Witnesses, the mentally and physically handicapped, trade unionists, resistance fighters, prisoners of war, political dissenters, even fellow Germans who even looked like they had something to hide. Virtually no one was spared.
There is a rich history in Islam of pictures depicting Muhammad.
http://www.newsweek.com/koran-does-not-forbid-images-prophet-298298
Sharia law did not always forbid depictions of the prophet…that started in the 19th century. I appreciate your comments re Holocaust jokes and do not understand why people seem to be unable to separate a joke about a religious leader/stance taken by a religion involving politics, from a joke attacking an individual in a stereotypical way. It is so clear. Mohammed and the muslims were not systematically killed because of who they are….
Dear Anonymous,
I am utterly disappointed to see that you are not informed enough to make such an article; you do put it online though, with loads of bullshit in it. You should have tried to understand french law and you should have learnt about the history of Charlie Hebdo before that.
First thing: satire aims at DESECRATING; it is made to laugh. It is not an insult, it’s not made to hurt or humiliate. In France, which is a secular democracy, satire is a part of popular culture. Here, it is allowed to mock anybody, but it’s not allowed to incite hatred or stigmatize (or deny the Holocaust). Charlie Hebdo mocks all religions (and political parties) equally. They even make fun of themselves on a regular basis. Charlie Hebdo is bold and defends the values of the republic: we are all equal (especially in dumbness). The fact that you publish some of their drawings WITH NO TRANSLATION, just assuming it’s offensive to Jews, is scandalous: it is a manipulation of the truth and I really didn’t expect this from you guys. You should have asked to someone who speaks french fluently and had lived here for years to explain them to you. It’s full of sarcasm and cultural references that you obviously don’t get. So you can’t tell if it’s offensive or not. And honestly, it’s so dumb it can’t be.
Second: Siné was fired by Philippe Val, then publishing director of Charlie Hebdo. The cartoonists, most of whom died last week, didn’t agree with that. There’s even a rumor saying they almost threw Val by the window. That’s how pissed they were. So you can’t blame them for being hypocritical. What happened is Val shit his pants in front of Jew people who called for censorship. And Val left Charlie Hebdo soon after the incident. So once again, you transform the truth, which is both an insult to the cartoonists who died last week and to us readers.
Please tell the truth.
You’re a terrible liar with all do respect, please tell the truth, and “insulting the dead”? hmmm, I thought it was called “freedom of speech” last time I checked, I hope you don’t feel bad, we still have good manners after all. thanks for your comment.
You have the chance to give information to many people. Therefore, you have a big responsibility: tell the truth. Freedom of speech concerns opinion, but before you have an opinion, you must acknowledge the facts. Check the facts before you put them online, or the version you give is biased. I thought that, more than other media, you were concerned about the truth. Don’t tell me I was wrong!
No, I won’t tell you you’re wrong, clearly you’re not this time, but what I was implying is that you should have said that to charlie hebdo before publishing the cartoons or at least when they did, at anonhq.com we rely on the community to help us uncover the truth, facts and evidence, not a bunch of mind terrorists hiding behind the freedom of speech and the crocodile tears (especially those tears), and causing more damage than good AKA charlie hebdo stereotype.
Thanks for your comment.
Crocodile tears? Soooo, the death of people from your community wouldn’t make you feel bad? Causing more damage than good? Bro, do you even future? What are you? A religious nut with his panties in a bunch? You’re a coward that fears tomorrow. These cartoons speak the truth: religion is irrational. Of all things that do more harm than good, religion takes the cake!
Please stay objective and evaluate the situation from a neutral view.
You said, that the former publishing director of Charlie Hebdo shit his pants in fron of Jew people. This never happened with muslim critics, well this is all you need to think about regarding freedom of speech at Charlie Hebdo. Doesn’t matter if this was a single case or not, it happened and the people need to know about it.
You are right, people need to know about it. And they also need to know that, at some point, people taking decisions at Charlie Hebdo and people making cartoons were not the same. Because that’s were the contradiction comes from. And I really don’t think you can give too much information, it helps people to have a better understanding about what happened.
Also, don’t you think you should provide translations for the cartoons that you published, assuming they are offensive? Don’t you think that you should justify what looks like a subjective statement?
Are only Jews Semitic people?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semite
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_people
Please don’t conflate the term “antisemitism” with “Semite”, a twisting either done out of ignorance or seeking to prey on the ignorance of others in pursuit of a political agenda.
During the enlightenment in Europe, as it fell out of fashion to hate Jews simply because they were Jews, around 1879 the term “antisemitism” was created by self-described Jew-haters as a scientific-sounding euphemism meaning “Jew-hater”. In other words, people attempted to disguise such hatred under the moniker of “antisemitism”.
In the 20th century we saw a new, politically correct, euphemism to (almost always) disguise Jew-hatred: anti-Zionism.
The term “antisemitism” has nothing to do with “Semitism” or “Semite”, just as “inflammable” does not mean the opposite of “flammable”. Words and terms do not simply mean the sum of their parts. Note that we park on drive-ways and drive on park-ways!
Drive-way ≠ Drive+Way
Park-way ≠ Park+Way
Anti-semitism ≠ Anti+Semitism
Biblical myths tell us that the sons of Noah were the forefathers of different peoples. Modern science takes issues with many of those groupings, and even if one is a fundamentalist I’m not sure why they would employ the term today.
The modern meaning of “Semitic” describes a LANGUAGE group. Strictly speaking, Jews who are not speakers of Hebrew (or another Semitic language) are not Semitic. Defining people based on obscure language groupings can be fairly tricky. Roughly half of Ethiopians speak a Semitic language – but the other half does not. Does this make Ethiopians Semites?
Regardless of such academic questions the etymology and definition of “antisemitic” means “anti-Jewish”.
Bernard Lewis writes:
|| “Semitic” was first used as a linguistic, not as an ethnic or racial, term. Like “Aryan,” it was coined by philologists to designate a group of related languages. Aryan included languages as diverse as Sanskrit, Persian, and, by extension, Greek, Latin, and most of the languages of Europe. Semitic, similarly, brought together Syriac, Arabic, Hebrew, and Ethiopic. Already in 1872 the great German philologist Max Müller pointed out that “Aryan” and “Semitic” were philological, not ethnological, terms and that to speak of an Aryan or Semitic race was as absurd as to speak of a dolichocephalic (long-headed) language. “What misunderstandings, what controversies would arise,” he said, from confusing the two—a correct if understated prediction.
|| Now that the German archives are open, we know that within weeks of Hitler’s coming to power in 1933, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem got in touch with the German consul general in Jerusalem, Doctor Heinrich Wolff, and offered his services. …In 1940 the French surrender gave the Nazis new opportunities for action in the Arab world. In Vichy-controlled Syria they were able for a while to establish an intelligence and propaganda base in the heart of the Arab East. From Syria they extended their activities to Iraq, where they helped to establish a pro-Nazi regime headed by Rashid Ali al-Gailani. This was overthrown by the British, and Rashid Ali went to join his friend the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in Berlin, where he remained as Hitler’s guest until the end of the war.
|| While in Berlin, Rashid Ali was apparently disquieted by the language and, more especially, the terminology of anti-Semitism. His concerns were authoritatively removed in an exchange of letters with an official spokesman of the German Nazi Party. In answer to a question from Rashid Ali as to whether anti-Semitism was also directed against Arabs, because they were part of the Semitic family, Professor Walter Gross, director of the Race Policy Office of the Nazi Party, explained with great emphasis, in a letter dated October 17, 1942, that this was not the case and that anti-Semitism was concerned wholly and exclusively with Jews.
http://books.google.com/books?id=tGzsn4snUyEC&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq=%22anti-Semitism+was+concerned+wholly+and+exclusively+with+Jews.%22&source=bl&ots=nzunSNlgz6&sig=FRnhnTV7a_MI1iDAKsFxezWVHLo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qHp8UqWBEJKGyQHTw4H4BA&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22anti-Semitism%20was%20concerned%20wholly%20and%20exclusively%20with%20Jews.%22&f=false
Lake> ‘melting pot’
A mid-20th century metaphor which already lost steam in the 1960s and 70s, giving way to the “Salad Bowl”.
But given that regressive model, it’s not surprising we get first a high-falutin ideal (1) followed by the real view (2):
Lake 1> we strive to not just tolerate, but really like one another.
Lake 2> If an individual wants not to conform, he can move away.
One doesn’t need to lose their identity and “conform” to be tolerated or liked.
The tomato can be red and still fit in with cucumbers and greens.
It gets worse:
Lake> The cartoons aren’t humor, but propaganda, which suits the Jewish community to a t.
Oh, dear. So “the Jewish community” is monolithic and has a “t”?
Why would “the Jewish community” desire to, what would it gain, from encouraging racism against another minority?
Lake> they fire people for anti-Semitic statements, but they are jovial in their support when the poor primitive Muslims are the target.
Wow. “Poor primitive Muslims”?!
At least, unlike the article, you recognize that Sine was fired not for attacking Judaism (Charles Hedbo does that all the time, along with Islam and Christianity), but for conjuring and promulgating Anti-Semitic stereotypes (as several other posters have correctly identified).
Lake> GREEDY JEW DEPICTIONS ARE FUNNY AND HAVE A POINT.
Oh? Really?
Lake> If we say, “Jews are greedy!” we may be saying that if they were to belay their greed, we might come to like them better.
Here we have a classic example of racist reversal. Lake doesn’t dis-like (or hate) Jews because they “are greedy”. Lake believes “Jews are greedy” because he hates Jews.
Lake> sometimes I concede Jews might really be superior.
Strange, Jews don’t consider themselves superior.
They claim descent not from gods or kings but from slaves.
They don’t condemn all non-Jews to eternal damnation in Hell.
Or even stipulate that only Jews can enter Heaven.
Are there any anti-Jewish stereotypes you don’t embrace?
Lake> Education might eventually bring all the Muslims into a 21st century attitude
And some Americans, we can only hope, too.
Freedom of Speech , has two stands for charlie’ . In 2009 , Sine – fired for remark on Judaism. But, mocking at islam continuously is patriotic?. What did you earn Charlie? . Ofcourse, 5 million copies , burnt churches, mosques, and people. “On ne voit bien qu’avec le cœur” – Charlie ! do you have one?
As noted several times on this page, the Sine cartoons were not satirizing Judaism but mocking Jews based on derogatory racial stereotypes. That’s racism.
Charlie firing Sine is not analogous to murdering him, nor was it a suppression of his free speech (he was free to publish them in another magazine or himself).
Perhaps it is time that Anon correct the headline and article to reflect these facts?
The Muhammad cartoons are satirising beliefs. The cartoons about Jewish people mentioned here are insulting Jewish people. One satirises beliefs, the other insults people. That’s the difference. They’re not the same.
Satire can be insulting to a people, it just depends on who is looking at the cartoon. Does anyone have examples of good satirical cartoons that Jewish people found funny?
Satire can be insulting to a people, it just depends on who is looking at the cartoon. Does anyone have examples of good satirical cartoons that Jewish people found funny?
i guess jews buy more copies of this rag than muslims. sorry charlie….err sine. to be clear. this was a comment on influence, not religion. afaic, all religions can go to hell, embrace your faith, whatever it might be.
I wasn’t informed about this double-standard…what a hypocrisy of Charlie Hebdo!!
Getting fired for a cartoon is different than getting shot for a cartoon. Sure, Charlie is biased against Islam. But that’s their political stance, big fucking deal. Also keep in mind that the Jews were victims of the most horrifically systematic genocide ever performed, whereas the extremist muslims of the world wish to enact worldwide genocide against non-believers. Drawing cartoons of Muhammad is like drawing the cartoon of a person leading a genocide, and therefore is similar to ridiculing Hitler; which is fine by me.
Cartoons are a depiction of reality in a symbolic way. That said, let’s try to understand this reality that they depict, in an objective way..
Reality is that Muslim populations around Europe & the Globe, are a result of all kinds of immigration movements over the last century. These migratory fluxes have taken place after various disasters affecting lots of Muslim States. Disasters such as wars, bombardments, civil riots, famines, unemployment, racial deportations, divided states etc. are well known to every person that cares to take a look at our contemporary history.
In all these disastrous events, the “West” was not only present as an offender for the sake of “democracy”, not only boycotting with vetos in the NATO, not only aggressive via racist propaganda, not only absent and inhumane towards “collateral damages” caused to unarmed people, but the “West” was in effect, accountant for crimes against the humanity. Crimes never paid.
On the other hand, the oppressed Muslim populations, in their states, or in Europe and elsewhere, were rapidly being poisoned with hatred from their religious leaders, that prepared “Martyrs” for the holy cause.
With Reality being exposed, let’s try to summarize and focus on some basic parameters that will help us understand the troubles we are facing:
A. When you start a war, you need to expect the answer..
B. When people are being oppressed and left in their destiny, religion takes its place..
C. No religion is superior than other..All organized religions have fanatics.
D. When radical thinkers of yesterday are being murdered by fanatics of today, the fascists of tomorrow are rubbing their hands, from enjoyment..
Welcome to reality, western people,
and remember to check whether your tax money go to the Arms Industry…
a citizen of fortress Europe
Why cant we all just get along.
Why cant you treat a complete stranger as you would do a friend.
This lack of understanding between people is madness and is a problem. Maybe if everyone just stopped for second and actually used their brains and thought seriously about life and what is really important, you would realise that words and images from a person who doesnt understand you can and should actually NEVER physically harm you, and instead of becoming emotionally weak and hurt feeling a retaliation is just, ask yourself as a wiser person and the lord to forgive them for there actions and be at peace, let it be and just laugh at it. I dont know if im getting my message across clearly but just as strangers become friends all it takes is communication between one human and another human. You as yourself not as something you represent I.e. your religious views, your ethnicity, your sex, your job title, etc. Stop letting stuff that doesnt matter speak or act for who you truly are. Maybe once we get this right, we might all be happier.
“no worldwide jewish conspiracy?” Who owns all the major news outlets, movie studios and banks? It ain’t the Irish!
Are you sure it’s not the worldwide ANTI-Jewish conspiracy that makes you believe that?
more you attach and more ppl of the world embrace Islam!!
Allahu Akbar!
and after that.. join italian dawa 😛
http://www.unitiperallah.blogspot.com
salam aleykum and peace be upon the loved you Mohammad(swa) the last messanger of Allah(swt)..
There is a lot off dimensions on this issue and its not an easy debate. First off all, there is off course a lot off hypocrisy from a lot off liberals on the questions on both terrorism an freedom off speech. For an example NATO “missile attack on Serbian state television headquarters” in April 24 1999, killing 16 journalists. Were was the protest against that as an attack on freedom of speech, those days? Th same thing about the media focus in general about terrorism, were there is little focus on west attacks on innocent people. We even call it war instead. Noam Chomsky have wrote a lot on this questions, read him to get some perspective.
Back on the specific question off free speech and satiric cartoons, I still think there is a difference in portraying a religious symbol ore a leader off institutional religions and to draw general caricatures off a people, ethical group ore races. The second perspective is that you always have to see he cartoons in its context, what is it really a comment on.
The last question is a more tricky one, people will always bee offended for various reasons. Whether it is justified or not to feel offended is sometimes on a thin line. A bit off a litmus test is the question if the person is already in an oppressed situation ore not. Humor is though not an easy question, we need to see it in both its ridiculousness and its small impact and in its wider political perspective.
What we should agree on is that freedom off speech always have to be very generous and we should accept a lot off its different expressions. We should also accept that we have to stand some shit from its impact. Personally I think both religion and power in the world always have to stand hard critics, even by the most bizzar paintings and freedom off speech should bee able to test limits of al ideological delusions. Off course we should act against racist and sexist attacks on the exploited and oppressed but freedom of speech at the same time comes before the right to not feel offended.
Like many French, I know on the fingertips the philosophy of Charlie, he has always fought against the ideology of all religions, including the lay worship and taboos (personality, power, the money, sex, nationalism, military, fascist, etc.). But he refused to attack people for their religious or ethnic affiliations (anti nationalist and anti fascists). Sine was a problem with “Jews” by putting them all in the same bag (Wolinski was a “Jewish atheist”), in addition to know the dered was quite unfriendly and aggressive guy, that was not really in place with Charlie very friendly team. However Sine was a good cartoonist on many other subjects.
Charlie did many cartoons about Judaism, but as a religion, and political sionary (Promised Land justifying all Arab bullying on the land of Palestine). Some cartoons may seem exessives (sympathetic Hitler), but they tend to mock the excesses of fascists, not to justify in the contrary.
Another person had to leave Charlie because she thought that criticize Islam favored the anti-Arab racism in France, while the rest of the writing thought that radical Islam was a form of fascism to fight like any other.
To be clear, Charlie first fight political cults following the catholiscism, criticism of Islam and sionism is marginal but succite more reactions, that’s all.
Particularism Charlie has always been to fight above all politically correct “bienséance”: Provide the “good taste” returned it to self censor, and that was its main target, it did not hesitate to make special editions on scatology for example. He denounced the absurdities by contradiction by advocating “phalocratie” for example, but so so outrageous that no one be fooled, and understand that it is in fact a humorous condemnation of this “phalocratie”, but being able to do the same thing with the extremist feminism.
When Islamism’s seek out, then harass, threatening murder, death, dismemberment, bodily harm against Jewish owned businesses their Kafir (infidel) employees, Jewish schools, and Synagogues across the USA in all fifty states, in the Euro Zone, and within Asia, how can one be that stupid idiotic moronic imbecilic enough, hence audacious enough not to see any connection between them, then to overtly articulate that these are exclusively lone wolf attacks which have nothing to do with the Male dominated Islamic ideological cults of death and enslavement.
Funny how over 1.75 Billion Muslims who control and dominate over 60% of the fossil fuel, Mineral wealth, and over 19% of the land mass of this entire planet are now somehow completely dominated by the Jews and Zionists!
It is so very ridiculous how in their enfeebled mind they could logically comprehend how over 1.75 billion Muslims with over 57 countries under Islamic domination are somehow dominated by Zionists and Jews who make up less than 15 Million worldwide, yet have but one small minuscule country with a land mass considerably less than the state of West Virginia and less than one third of the country of Panama.
If the Jews and Zionists have all of these Media, Public, Private institutions, all of this planets resources and lands you allude to supposedly under Zionist and Jewish complete control and domination, then name them?
Funny how hateful hollow prejudiced minimal of mind antagonist whose sole purpose is to be imbecilic and ill-educated about everything and anything that is not a complete utter prevarication is the victim!
shut up parasite jew. Keep trying to manipulate me. Yoru tiny weak bones and frail deformed body god cursed you with dont look strong enough to be trying to manipulate someone like me and take over nations like jewmerica.
“Europe has not yet learned to be multicultural. Europe is not gonna be the monolithic societies they once were in the last century. Jews are gonna be at the center of it. They are now going into a multicultural mode. Jews will be resented because our leading role, but without that transformation europe will not survive”- Jewess Barbara Spectre
” Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.” Joel STEIN of the LA times
“Who runs Hollywood? C’mon”
December 19, 2008 “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” – Joel Stein LA times
“Jews do control the media” – Israel Times July 1st 2012
“The Chinese Believe That the Jews Control America. Is That a Good Thing?” – Tablet March 27 2014
“Ashkenazi Jews are not white” -The times of Israel DECEMBER 5, 2014
“Media Control: Top Jewish Supremacist Takes over Britain’s Guardian Newspaper” -David Duke dotty com
TYT
2 jews one turk.
Creator(s) Cenk Uygur[1]
Ben Mankiewicz[2]
Dave Koller[2]
Google/youtube= 2 jews
Facebook=Faceberg
Freedom of speech means freedom from legal or physical punishment, but does not entail an obligation for every magazine to publish everything. Each medium can set its own limits and be as biased as it wants.
You are probably just uneducated or downright stupid. (brainwashed by the parasite jew). Or a parasite jew yourself considering you have to post every other comment about how great jews are and try to brainwash more of your goyim slaves.
” Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.” Joel STEIN of the LA times
“Who runs Hollywood? C’mon”
December 19, 2008 “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” – Joel Stein LA times
“Jews do control the media” – Israel Times July 1st 2012
“The Chinese Believe That the Jews Control America. Is That a Good Thing?” – Tablet March 27 2014
“Ashkenazi Jews are not white” -The times of Israel DECEMBER 5, 2014
“Media Control: Top Jewish Supremacist Takes over Britain’s Guardian Newspaper” -David Duke dotty com
TYT
2 jews one turk.
Creator(s) Cenk Uygur[1]
Ben Mankiewicz[2]
Dave Koller[2]
Google/youtube= 2 jews
Facebook=Faceberg
“Europe has not yet learned to be multicultural. Europe is not gonna be the monolithic societies they once were in the last century. Jews are gonna be at the center of it. They are now going into a multicultural mode. Jews will be resented because our leading role, but without that transformation europe will not survive”- Jewess Barbara Spectre
” Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.” Joel STEIN of the LA times
“Who runs Hollywood? C’mon”
December 19, 2008 “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” – Joel Stein LA times
“Jews do control the media” – Israel Times July 1st 2012
“The Chinese Believe That the Jews Control America. Is That a Good Thing?” – Tablet March 27 2014
“Ashkenazi Jews are not white” -The times of Israel DECEMBER 5, 2014
“Media Control: Top Jewish Supremacist Takes over Britain’s Guardian Newspaper” -David Duke dotty com
TYT
2 jews one turk.
Creator(s) Cenk Uygur[1]
Ben Mankiewicz[2]
Dave Koller[2]
Google/youtube= 2 jews
Facebook=Faceberg
Cartoons of the Holocaust are hardly the same as mocking a man or a prophet. Firstly, many would say there is no evidence that Mohammad existed and they could make that claim without being considered anti-Islam. I don’t know how you could do the same about the Holocaust without being anti-Semitic. The evidence the holocaust happened is greater and more overwhelming than the evidence Mohammad ever existed. 6 million people were murdered for their faith/ethnicity…that’s an event pretty hard to satire. Famous and infamous individuals are lot easier especially one who makes – according to many – grandiose claims. So, I can clearly see a difference. Mocking the prophet Mohammad (pbuh) is not a good idea in my opinion, but it’s not racist. Insinuating Jews love money etc is a well known racist stereotype of Jews. So therefore it is racist. Racist stereotypes of Muslims should be treated the same way if they come up, not tolerated. Cartoons ridiculing Mohammad is not racist.
Exactly right, and that is why there isn’t a “double standard” or “hypocrisy”.
Why don’t Christians just stop their hate speech? Stop disrespecting our religion, because we’re not going away. You see, we BELIEVE, unlike the nominally Christian West. Mocking Jesus doesn’t bother you, because you don’t really love him.
Now here is hypocrisy. alkh3myst thinks that “Christians” and the “nominally Christian West’ should “stop their hate speech”, but his hate speech is fine?
Yet he says nothing about the MURDERS? That’s okay and an appropriate response to “hate speech”?
Brooklyn Imam Tareq Yousef Al-Masri
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/4748.htm
Brooklyn Imam Tareq Yousef Al-Masri:
Hello,
I have just been redirected from another article on this one, and I think it is important to clarify several points, as a French person.
First, I am a little “sad” to see that this article has been written only one week after the events. French people, like me, were not only devastated because of the “freedom of speech” symbol, but because the persons who were killed were people we loved, and who contributed to the national debate. Cabu was first drawing picture for “kids” shows when I was kid, and Bernard Maris was one of the rare “left wing” economist who was defending the exploited on television, with a real sense of pedagogy. Without these persons, the debate is unbalanced.
And so, one week after this tragedy, while we were still mourning these people, you were already trying to show how Charlie Hebdo did not deserve attention ? Why not… but this is “sad”.
And this is “sad” for other reasons. Because your article considers “Charlie Hebdo” as a static entity, which would not have evolved from years… but… The event you are referring to (firing Siné) took place when Philippe Val was the director of Charlie Hebdo, and… he is not director since 2009. Considering that the “today” newspaper is the same as the “before 2009” is fallacious because this does not take into account the context of the journal.
Moreover, I disagree with your comparisons. While I do think Siné should not have been fired, I do see a real difference between caricaturing extremism, and playing on “cliché” without any context. When Siné draw someone, telling that he would become rich by turning “jew”, then I see something playing on cliché, without any context to justify that.
When I say “context”, I refer to, for instance, the controversial cover with a black minister holding a banana. This is awful, but was justifiable in the “context” of France, because someone, from the Front National (extreme-right party of France), previously compared the minister with a monkey in the media. By doing so, Charlie Hebdo was showing the horror of what the person said.
But here, there was no context for, suddenly, bringing the “jew = good to handle money” cliché.
And for the Muslim caricatures, again, it was in a context of tensions because of previous caricatures published in Denmark. And then, the caricatures about Islam were about criticising the extremism of some, not about making fun of all the believers.
And the same goes for Catholicism Judaism, etc. Charlie Hebdo is not against religions, but against the way some people can use them to do terrible things to the society.
Charlie Hebdo sure did some mistake. Firing Siné was one of them. Some caricatures were truly borderline. And this is not my favourite newspaper at all.
In France, we say “Comparaison n’est pas raison” (Comparisons are odious). I think the comparisons made in your article are deforming the reality, even if you claim, at the end, an objective consideration of the caricatures.
It was interesting to read you article though, even if I still think the time frame was not really respectful of the genuine sadness that we were going through.
Should France rethink its “freedom of speech” definition ? Yes, definitely ! But we are constantly debating about that, so do not worry, things are evolving.
Meanwhile, thank you for reading me.
Raphaël
Raphael, the rulers of this world
are the Jew Rothschild banksters.
And it is they who are the chief
oppressors. If it is the case
that some Muslims overstayed
their welcome, they are still
very small fry, compared to the
Rothschild banksters and their
Talmudic minions, not to mention
I$raHell set up by the Rothschilds
as their ‘pet project’…
Wait, how is drawing unflattering pictures of Muhammad, ONE SPECIFIC person, the same as drawing a black man with a banana falling out of a tree, or a Jew counting money in entrails? How can you not see the difference between those two things? The first makes fun of ONE SPECIFIC PERSON, and the other two make caricatures out of groups of people. How dense is this author?
If religion is the problem then how do you explain Stalin and Mao? Intolerant ideologies are the problem, be they extreme islam, communism or anything else that comes along. Secularism and consumerism can also be intolerant ideologies.
As the French used to say: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.
CH feels it is legitimate to write such articles about muslims because muslims are killing people in france. They dont feel that they can attack jews because jews aren’t killing anyone in france. They generally mock all religions and have published plenty of anti-jewish/christian/everything cartoons.
We are seeing an dangerous rise of nationalism. We’ve seen this sort of thing before. It didn’t end well.