Support NeoGAF

[Klossen]

According to the Muslim website 5Pillars the award was given to Charlie Hebdo because of its “continual stoking of Islamophobic sentiment by caricaturing Muslims as terrorists"

Guess they should've also won the hindsight award of the year aswell...

 

[SolarPowered]

Fair imho. What Charlie Hebdo was pushing transcends criticism and was pure hate speech. It is disgusting they are being martyrized. There is a saying that says talk shit get hit that applies here.

Not saying the terrorists that did this were justified. Far from it. They deserve their punishment 150% for what they did. But with what Charlie was publishing, you can't really be surprised

A perfect example of posting before thinking.

sheesh

 

[Drencrom]

Can we please start banning people that victim blame civilians that get massacred by fucking terrorists over drawings?

If we can ban people over victim blaming rape-victims and people for being console fanboys, why not for RATIONALIZING AND CONDONING TERRORISM too?

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

Can't you say Charlie Hebdo are dicks (who obviously don't deserve to be murdered) but the people who killed them are absolute scum?

Sure, you just can't imply that they deserved/should have expected/asked to be killed for their satire.

They can still be dicks.

 

[Jenov]

I didn't sat that. I said the murderers deserve their punishment.

But you're not at all surprised that the cartoonists got what was coming to them though, eh? TALK SHIT GET HIT BRO!

 

[marrec]

Can we please start banning people that victim blame civilians that get massacred by fucking terrorists over drawings?

If we can ban people over victim blaming rape-victims and people for being console fanboys, why not for RATIONALIZING AND CONDONING TERRORISM too?

As long as we can also ban people who needlessly post "RELIGION OF PEACE" in all caps as if they're trying to point out the irony of Islam having extremists.

 

[jakonovski]

Freedom of speech everywhere!

 

[demon]

When will these assholes realize that the very fact that criticizing or mocking their religion puts one's life in grave danger is the very reason they're a target for mockery? Fuck these barbarians and their retarded ass "religious" practices.

Fair imho. What Charlie Hebdo was pushing transcends criticism and was pure hate speech. It is disgusting they are being martyrized. There is a saying that says talk shit get hit that applies here.

Not saying the terrorists that did this were justified. Far from it. They deserve their punishment 150% for what they did. But with what Charlie was publishing, you can't really be surprised

Truly civilized societies can handle "hate" speech, offensive satire and severe criticism of personal beliefs. Christians seem to be able to take it. Why can't these radical Muslims? As I said, they're nothing more than barbarians, and the very fact that this kind of retaliation is "to be expected" is barbaric and 100% on the Muslims who commit and support it. 100%. They need to join the 21st century and lighten the fuck up. Any belief that necessitates murder as a response to criticism or mockery of said belief has absolutely no place in modern society and needs to be rooted out.

 

[lazer_bean]

They won a publicly voted award for "international islamophobe of the year".

IHRC hasn't made an official statement about the award.

5pillars spewed vile shit about it.

Breitbart then spins it to try and further paint the IHRC as a radical movement.

Everyone who is involved is shit.

Edit:

ah ok, I get it now. Thanks for the summary

 

[Kurdel]

They won a publicly voted award for "international islamophobe of the year".

IHRC hasn't made an official statement about the award.
Everyone who is involved is shit.

The IHRC dude wants Charlie Hebdo to be held responsable for protesters hurt in riots about cartoons. I mean, how out of touch with reality must you be to say a thing like that?

Massoud Shadjareh, who has been chair of the IHRC since 2011, says the award was not an endorsement of the attacks but was meant to be satirical.

“The overwhelming majority of people voted for Charlie Hebdo. I think in some ways it’s appropriate. The complaint that was made by Charlie Hebdo was that we Muslims do not have a sense of humour and we take things literally and we need to chill out and take what is thrown at us in good humour,” says Shadjareh.

Shadjareh says it would be double standards to see the IHRC as condoning the Charlie Hebdo attacks, which he calls “barbaric”. He points out that the publication of the cartoons led to injuries and deaths in protest marches across the Islamic world, including in Pakistan and Niger, yet the magazine was absolved of any responsibility.

“You cannot have one side responsible and one side not responsible,” he says.

 

[methane47]

As long as we can also ban people who needlessly post "RELIGION OF PEACE" in all caps as if they're trying to point out the irony of Islam having extremists.

So you are Ok with banning people for making fun of people
As long as people are also banned for making fun of a religion

GOT IT

 

[BocoDragon]

I am one of those people who urged for a nuance in this discussion. I personally wouldn't insult Islam just to prove a point, even as it should be legal and (obviously) free from retribution.

But giving this an award is SICK. Holy crap. "Bad taste" doesn't begin to describe it.

 

[stupei]

I know this is a massive generalization, but this seems like an oxymoron.

Fucking seriously?

Obviously this was in bad taste. Even though they are right that Charlie Hebdo is responsible for a lot of disgusting Islamophobia, it comes across as disrespectful, and if anything it further sets back public perception. It feels like a purely emotional response, rather than a carefully reasoned one that fully takes into account this particular context and how it will feel to survivors and loved ones.

But then a lot of the responses in this thread are pretty poorly considered purely emotional reactions, so I guess they're not the only ones.

So you are Ok with banning people for making fun of people
As long as people are also banned for making fun of a religion

GOT IT

There's a difference between implying that you think someone's beliefs are silly/strange and implying that everyone who has those beliefs is likely to be a terrorist.

 

[marrec]

The IHRC dude wants Charlie Hebdo to be held responsable for protesters hurt in riots about cartoons. I mean, how out of touch with reality must you be to say a thing like that?

Yep, guy's priorities are fucked and his opinion about Hebdo is shit.

These "awards" are clearly not meant to be anything more than a way to skewer those their readership doesn't agree with. Last year Barack Obama won, for example.

 

[Megalosaro]

When will these assholes realize that the very fact that criticizing or mocking their religion puts one's life in grave danger is the very reason they're a target for mockery? Fuck these barbarians and their retarded ass "religious" practices.


Truly civilized societies can handle "hate" speech, offensive satire and severe criticism of personal beliefs. Christians seem to be able to take it. Why can't these radical Muslims? As I said, they're nothing more than barbarians, and the very fact that this kind of retaliation is "to be expected" is barbaric and 100% on the Muslims who commit and support it. 100%. They need to join the 21st century and lighten the fuck up. Any belief that necessitates murder as a response to criticism or mockery of said belief has absolutely no place in modern society and needs to be rooted out.

You're comparing,moderate Christianity to radical Islam. I guarantee you if a publisher printed as offensive comics about about Jesud that were as high profile and widely accepted, you'd see some really nasty radical push back.

 

[Jenov]

You're comparing,moderate Christianity to radical Islam. I guarantee you if a publisher printed as offensive comics about about Jesud that were as high profile and widely accepted, you'd see some really nasty radical push back.

Dude, there is a infamous artwork of Jesus Christ on the cross dunked in a jar of piss. No one was killed for it.

 

[methane47]

You're comparing,moderate Christianity to radical Islam. I guarantee you if a publisher printed as offensive comics about about Jesud that were as high profile and widely accepted, you'd see some really nasty radical push back.

Charlie Hebdo also published offensive cartoons about jesus.
no radical push back.
eg: https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/charliehebdo31.jpg?w=640

That said, Christianity is no better from islam or any other religion, they are just in different stages of existence.

There's a difference between implying that you think someone's beliefs are silly/strange and implying that everyone who has those beliefs is likely to be a terrorist.

You get "everyone in islam is a terrorist" from someone saying "Religion of Peace"?

 

[esms]

Fucking seriously?

Obviously this was in bad taste. Even though they are right that Charlie Hebdo is responsible for a lot of disgusting Islamophobia, it comes across as disrespectful, and if anything it further sets back public perception. It feels like a purely emotional response, rather than a carefully reasoned one that fully takes into account this particular context and how it will feel to survivors and loved ones.

But then a lot of the responses in this thread are pretty poorly considered purely emotional reactions, so I guess they're not the only ones.

I dunno, man. My mind jumped to Islam as a foundation for a country's laws, like Saudi Arabia. I wasn't trying to imply all Muslims were terrorists or didn't care about human rights.

Thought it was additionally comical in context of an alleged Islamaphobe award for victims of Islamic terrorism.

 

[G.ZZZ]

Can we please start banning people that victim blame civilians that get massacred by fucking terrorists over drawings?

If we can ban people over victim blaming rape-victims and people for being console fanboys, why not for RATIONALIZING AND CONDONING TERRORISM too?

This. This shit is disgusting. I'm not sure why "she asked for it" is bannable but "they had it coming" is not.

 

[Rush_Khan]

In my opinion, this is a really stupid award, especially when it's given to people who are dead. If you're going to spread Islam in a positive light, then labelling and mocking Islamaphobes is probably not the best start. That said, they have every right to give this award to whoever they want. Don't know why people are getting angry over it.

 

[jakonovski]

Dude, there is a infamous artwork of Jesus Christ on the cross dunked in a jar of piss. No one was killed for it.

If Piss Christ was done in a rich, first world Muslim country, targeting disenfranchised Christian immigrants, the chance would shoot up significantly.

Group dynamics are always the same. It's the circumstances that change.

 

[demon]

You're comparing,moderate Christianity to radical Islam. I guarantee you if a publisher printed as offensive comics about about Jesud that were as high profile and widely accepted, you'd see some really nasty radical push back.

You're being delusional. There have been countless instances of ridiculously over the top criticisms or mockeries of Christianity that resulted in little to no death threats. South Park had a clip of Jesus Christ being shit on and I doubt that Matt Stone and Trey Parker lost any sleep over it. What I'm comparing is the risk of mocking Christianity to the risk of mocking Islam (or merely depicting Muhammad). It's night and day.

 

[TimeEffect]

Shadjareh says it would be double standards to see the IHRC as condoning the Charlie Hebdo attacks, which he calls “barbaric”. He points out that the publication of the cartoons led to injuries and deaths in protest marches across the Islamic world, including in Pakistan and Niger, yet the magazine was absolved of any responsibility.

“You cannot have one side responsible and one side not responsible,” he says.

Geez. Dude doesn't try very hard to hide his transparency. I imagine this is a popular argument to support the victimhood angle of drawing Muhammad cartoons, which in itself is seen as persecution of Muslims

 

[King_Moc]

You're being delusional. There have been countless instances of ridiculously over the top criticisms or mockeries of Christianity that resulted in little to no death threats. South Park had a clip of Jesus Christ being shit on and I doubt that Matt Stone and Trey Parker lost any sleep over it. What I'm comparing is the risk of mocking Christianity to the risk of mocking Islam (or merely depicting Muhammad). It's night and day.

Look into Jerry Springer the Opera. I agree that there's still a night and day difference, but there were death threats amongst other things after that.

 

[Mrmartel]

You're comparing,moderate Christianity to radical Islam. I guarantee you if a publisher printed as offensive comics about about Jesud that were as high profile and widely accepted, you'd see some really nasty radical push back.

Not a chance. Like the poster above that mentioned "Piss Christ" which was very high profile at the time, nothing that I can recall has ever pushed Christians to slaughter people for offensive work in modern times.

Unless you know something I don't? Do tell. I rather that than hypothetical (wishful) thinking of a future event that would happen under the same circumstances, when time and time again it has never occurred.

 

[demon]

Look into Jerry Springer the Opera. I agree that there's still a night and day difference, but there were death threats amongst other things after that.

I'm not familiar with it, but I'm comparing them in general. Was there any follow-through on those death threats?

 

[G.ZZZ]

You're comparing,moderate Christianity to radical Islam. I guarantee you if a publisher printed as offensive comics about about Jesud that were as high profile and widely accepted, you'd see some really nasty radical push back.

What the fuck are you saying. There are tons of magazines satirizing jews and christians. There's a local one just in right of front of me :

On jews:

"Jews not saving any money in shelling palestinians: the world shocked, what jews they are!" (implying jews are cheap even when killing people)

This is about Jesus:

You get a magazine filled of this shit every week. In catholic Italy and no one ever gave a shit. Welcome to the real world.

 

[King_Moc]

I'm not familiar with it, but I'm comparing them in general. Was there any follow-through on those death threats?

Nope, they just protested the show to the point that they forced it into financial non-viability.

 

[methane47]

If Piss Christ was done in a rich, first world Muslim country, targeting disenfranchised Christian immigrants, the chance would shoot up significantly.

Group dynamics are always the same. It's the circumstances that change.

That's a lot of what ifs for that scenario...

So the contrary should also be true right?
Someone in a a first world Muslim country should be able to make a Piss Muhammad cartoon and NOT have any riots or violence or repercussions?

 

[Game-Biz]

Fair imho. What Charlie Hebdo was pushing transcends criticism and was pure hate speech. It is disgusting they are being martyrized. There is a saying that says talk shit get hit that applies here.

Not saying the terrorists that did this were justified. Far from it. They deserve their punishment 150% for what they did. But with what Charlie was publishing, you can't really be surprised

What a fucking disgusting and shameful post.

 

[G.ZZZ]

Look into Jerry Springer the Opera. I agree that there's still a night and day difference, but there were death threats amongst other things after that.

You get death threats on literally everything dude. There's a difference in saying i'll fucking kill you and actually having the rotted brain to go and do so.

 

[lazer_bean]

You're comparing,moderate Christianity to radical Islam. I guarantee you if a publisher printed as offensive comics about about Jesud that were as high profile and widely accepted, you'd see some really nasty radical push back.

Charlie Hebdo printed satire of muslims as much as catholics, jews, the military or basically everyone. On a weekly basis since 1992.
You seem to think they were only hitting on muslims (or more than the other religions) and if so, you are far from the truth.

 

[jakonovski]

nothing that I can recall has ever pushed Christians to slaughter people for offensive work in modern times.

Rich, affluent societies don't get societal unrest from the main populace. They do invade small countries for oil. The capacity for violence is always there but the justifications change form, as does the level of discipline in its application.

People really need to read about how the human animal works, instead of going for simplifications that don't reflect the psychological processes at work.

 

[nib95]

Can we please start banning people that victim blame civilians that get massacred by fucking terrorists over drawings?

If we can ban people over victim blaming rape-victims and people for being console fanboys, why not for RATIONALIZING AND CONDONING TERRORISM too?

Justifying terrorism and disagreeing with the content that Charlie Hebdo publishes are two very different things. There's an important discussion about freedom of speech and freedom to hate or offend to be had, that falls outside of the tragic incident itself.

 

[jakonovski]

That's a lot of what ifs for that scenario...

So the contrary should also be true right?
Someone in a a first world Muslim country should be able to make a Piss Muhammad cartoon and NOT have any riots or violence or repercussions?

Yeah, but we don't have any first world Muslim countries. The closest is Turkey, and I do wonder what sort of controversial art has happened there.

 

[Drencrom]

As long as we can also ban people who needlessly post "RELIGION OF PEACE" in all caps as if they're trying to point out the irony of Islam having extremists.

I just thought it's pretty ironic that an international organization called Islamic Human Rights Commision condones terrorism and blames the vicitms for being islamophobes, I now know they are an outlier (at least you say so). My intention was definitely NOT to insult or imply that all muslims are terrorists and I'm sorry if my dumb and unnecessary blurb I offended anyone and I'll take a measured ban for it if I must, as long as people that victim blame people that got murdered by terrorists gets a ban too. The rhetoric that these people on any level 'deserved' getting killed is just too disgusting to me.

Edit: missed writing the NOT part...

 

[nib95]

I just thought it's pretty ironic that an international organization called Islamic Human Rights Commision condones terrorism and blames the vicitms for being islamophobes, I now know they are an outlier (at least you say so). My intention wasn't to imply that all muslims are terrorists and I'm sorry if my dumb and unnecessary blurb I offended anyone and I'll take a measured ban for it if I must, as long as people that victim blame people that got murdered by terrorists gets a ban too. The rhetoric that these people on any level 'deserved' getting killed is just too disgusting to me.

Can you point me to where they, or anyone else in here justified the terrorism or murders, and said they deserve to be killed? I'd like to see it.

 

[Jenov]

If Piss Christ was done in a rich, first world Muslim country, targeting disenfranchised Christian immigrants, the chance would shoot up significantly.

Group dynamics are always the same. It's the circumstances that change.

What is this stretch to try and equalize the two when they're clearly at different points culturally? Christianity has mostly grown past a lot of the pitchforks and fire for blasphemy crap, meanwhile Islam is still dealing with getting past that phase. Some Islamic countries have done much worst than stupid drawings when it comes to respecting other religions. Hell, the leaders of Iran have had outright Holocaust denial conventions.

 

[neorej]

Stop who is Muslim of the year according to IHRC? Looks like ISIS is a strong contender.

 

[Mrmartel]

Rich, affluent societies don't get societal unrest from the main populace. They do invade small countries for oil. The capacity for violence is always there but the justifications change form, as does the level of discipline in its application.

People really need to read about how the human animal works, instead of going for simplicities that don't reflect the psychological processes at work.

Sure you could go deep into the Human Pysche and find anything goes, with certain triggers. I am just going with what I know from history and current world events.

I was responding to a poster who was making an hypothetical equivalency of Islam and Christianity by suggesting they are just as likely to commit similar acts when there is absolutely no proof of that. Just calling out BS.

 

[demon]

You get death threats on literally everything dude. There's a difference in saying i'll fucking kill you and actually having the rotted brain to go and do so.

Yeah I was about to edit my last post with this.....death threats are one thing, but following through is a whole other story. If I created two cartoons each mocking Christianity and Islam and received death threats for both, sorry, but I'd be far more worried about the threats coming those offended by the Islam one. That's just being realistic.

 

[Drencrom]

Can you point me to where they, or anyone else in here justified the terrorism or murders, and said they deserve to be killed? I'd like to see it.

I didn't say anyone directly justifies the terroriss, but a previous poster essentially vicitm blamed the people at Charlie Hebdo that they 'shouldn't be surprised' and 'if you talk shit, you get hit' etc. I've seen this before in other threads and it's too much for me. I'm not saying that you can't condone the terrorist's actions and disagree with Charlie Hebdo's way of making fun of religion either.

 

[y2dvd]

Can't you say Charlie Hebdo are dicks (who obviously don't deserve to be murdered) but the people who killed them are absolute scum?

Wait, why would you say Charlie Hebdo are dicks? Because of satire? That's like saying I'm a dick for making fun of Santa Claus or the tooth fairy.

 

[jakonovski]

What is this stretch to try and equalize the two when they're clearly at different points culturally? Christianity has mostly grown past a lot of the pitchforks and fire for blasphemy crap, meanwhile Islam is still dealing with getting past that phase. Muslim countries have done much worst than stupid drawings when it comes to respecting other religions. Hell, the leaders of Iran have had outright Holocaust denial conventions.

And keeping that in mind, what's the point about raging how Muslims should just take it? What's the end game in that, permanent hostilities? Nobody wins like that.

Being past pitchforks means leaving them in the shed even if there's a terror attack. The correct answer is to deal with the attackers and continue bridging differences.

 

[G.ZZZ]

Rich, affluent societies don't get societal unrest from the main populace. They do invade small countries for oil. The capacity for violence is always there but the justifications change form, as does the level of discipline in its application.

People really need to read about how the human animal works, instead of going for simplifications that don't reflect the psychological processes at work.

Yeah, too bad the charlie hebdo killers were french born citizens.

 

[jakonovski]

Yeah, too bad the charlie hebdo killers were french born citizens.

Yes, and?

 

[Opiate]

You're comparing,moderate Christianity to radical Islam. I guarantee you if a publisher printed as offensive comics about about Jesud that were as high profile and widely accepted, you'd see some really nasty radical push back.

This just doesn't seem to be the case. There have been and still is lots of insulting satire aimed at Christians (and Jews, and others) without an outcry. Charlie Hebdo itself has done so on multiple occasions.

You can make an argument that circumstances are different, and that these comparisons aren't fair, but if you are going to compare them, then those comparisons are unflattering for modern Islamic culture.

 

[marrec]

Stop who is Muslim of the year according to IHRC? Looks like ISIS is a strong contender.

According to 5pillarz, these are the positive award winners.

Imam Achmad Cassiem – A veteran of the anti-Apartheid struggle in South Africa, Imam Cassiem is a veteran campaigner against racism and Islamophobia. He joined the armed struggle against the oppressive apartheid regime as a 15 year-old boy and at the age of 17 became one of the youngest people to be imprisoned on Robben Island alongside Nelson Mandela. Today, Achmad Cassiem is an Imam and Founder of the Islamic Unity Convention in South Africa and a tireless campaigner against Islamophobia on a national and international level.

Abdel-Rahmène Azzouzi – Professor Azzouzi is a councillor in the French city of Angers. Earlier this year he decided to stand down from his position in protest at the rampant Islamophobia in his country. He announced his decision in a frank open letter published widely in France in which he described French secularism as a weapon used to attack Muslims. Azzouzi decried the Islamophobic policies of the state saying that they risked making France the most Islamophobic nation in the world.

Arun Kundnani – One of the country’s leading authorities on Islamophobia, Kundnani has unpicked the raft of anti-terror laws and policies enacted since the turn of the millenium and analysed their impact on Muslims. In 2014 his new book ‘The Muslims are Coming: Islamophobia, Extremism and the Domestic War on Terror’ was published to great acclaim. Based on several years of research and reportage in the UK and US, the book is the first comprehensive critique of counter-radicalisation strategies, an area in which Kundnani has developed an unrivalled expertise.

Community of Cold Lake, Canada – When the local mosque in Cold Lake, Alberta was vandalised last year the non-Muslim community rallied round to help their Muslim neighbours clean up and repair the damage. Islamophobes had attacked the mosque overnight spraying messages such as “Go home” on the building. After Friday prayers volunteers cleaned up the graffiti and removed the racist scrawlings. Some even taped messages like “You Are Home” and “Love Your Neighbour” on the mosque windows to show their support. The response was a perfect demonstration of a community coming together to oppose bigotry and Islamophobia. It set off a trend whereby local communities rally round to offer their support to the victims after such incidents.

 

[methane47]

And keeping that in mind, what's the point about raging how Muslims should just take it? What's the end game in that, permanent hostilities? Nobody wins like that.

Being past pitchforks means leaving them in the shed even if there's a terror attack. The correct answer is to deal with the attackers and continue bridging differences.

............wat?

What exactly do you mean here? Are you saying that everyone should just be OK with Extremist muslims acting out with violence against free speech?

or are you saying that we should be OK with muslim organizations supporting the acts of people who act out in violence?

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

And keeping that in mind, what's the point about raging how Muslims should just take it? What's the end game in that, permanent hostilities? Nobody wins like that.

Being past pitchforks means leaving them in the shed even if there's a terror attack. The correct answer is to deal with the attackers and continue bridging differences.

Or, you know, they could learn to tolerate criticism of their religion, or even a flattering depiction of their prophet.

Hostilities would diminish if they caught up to the 21st century with the other major world religions, or y'know we could do what you suggest and just bend over backwards not to offend them because they might hurt us.