Gunmen attack Satirical French Magazine office

[nin10mode]

I'm having more informations now. They confirm my point of view.

The problem I see is the ambiguity of this statement. Who is 'they'? The terrorists out the comic artists?

[Supershroom]

Oops, "information" doesn't have a plural

I've wanted to say "I have more information which confirms my point of view"

[-BY]

Humanity has proven once again that it doesn't understand satires.

I'm often wondering how these things actually start on the planning level.
I mean. I never felt the intention, nor knowing someone who'd go over to some friends or whatever and tell them about my hate towards a magazine. Furthermore I wouldn't feel the need to even go to the magazine's origin place, planning a terroristic action is even more idiotic. Actually going for the action tops idiocy and should deserve a very own word, actually.

In short. I'm starting an ant campaign. They're at least not hating satires, right?

[MessengerOfDreams]

The way you're speaking, Shroom, makes me think that you're saying we need to mind what we say in case of terrorists. And as an American who doesn't give two ♥♥♥♥ about any flag and gags at all of the overt jingoism in America, i hate saying this, but... I'm pretty sure that means the terrorists win.

[-BY]

The way you're speaking, Shroom, makes me think that you're saying we need to mind what we say in case of terrorists. And as an American who doesn't give two ♥♥♥♥ about any flag and gags at all of the overt jingoism in America, i hate saying this, but... I'm pretty sure that means the terrorists win.

Germany at it's best. Hiding, ignoring and hating anything beyond the borders blindly.

[Supershroom]

The way you're speaking, Shroom, makes me think that you're saying we need to mind what we say in case of terrorists. And as an American who doesn't give two ♥♥♥♥ about any flag and gags at all of the overt jingoism in America, i hate saying this, but... I'm pretty sure that means the terrorists win.

Of course, if Charlie Hebdo (and any other satirical magazines) stops making provocative and hatred-fueling cartoons (which I really hope), these terrorists can record this as a victory, while in fact they can record every succeeded attack as a "victory". It's sad, but this attack has been truly provoked over the years, and now the camel's back has broken. As ghastly and abominable this outrage is, it's no wonder as well. And to avoid further bloodshed, Charlie Hebdo should really back-pedal and make cartoons about any things but not religion and especially not that blunt. Like I've said, things like Mohammed with a bomb exceed the limits. And these limits aren't only defined by extremists.

[Doram]

This post by Bogdan was thumbed up by:

Doram (January 9th, 2015, 1:52 pm)

[Harmless]

Okay Shroom, so people making fun of Obama and making satirical cartoons about him means that Democrats should take up arms and start shooting the American Cartoonists who poke fun at him.

[MessengerOfDreams]

This post by #4715 was thumbed up by: 2

l.m (January 8th, 2015, 1:54 pm) • MessengerOfDreams (January 8th, 2015, 2:27 pm)

[l.m]

Okay Shroom, so people making fun of Obama and making satirical cartoons about him means that Democrats should take up arms and start shooting the American Cartoonists who poke fun at him.

This is a different situation. Religion is a more delicate and complicated matter. People take religion way too seriously, and will kill and murder to defend their own.

If you make fun of Obama, there is a big chance that people won't react.

But if you make fun of Jesus or Mohammed or any other, you'll see the chaos. They'll fight. Defend their religion and the values connected to their religion.