Mass Shooting At Newspaper In Paris

The Daily Beast "in solidarity" publishes 12 Charlie Hebdo covers.

But, take a look at the 12 they choose: http://thebea.st/1HMTPEt

 

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

 

Perhaps. Either way, it's willful ignorance. No one who pays attention to our world would believe in such comparative nonsense. Needing to consistently broadcast things like that is a dangerous compulsion.

 

There's still plenty of restraint. Freedom of speech is important and all, but you need to pick your spots. Sometimes you should just keep quiet. No reason to offend.

 

From 2012 and worth a read.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-charlie-hebdo-affair-laughing-at-blasphemy

 

Yeah, the New Yorker yucked it up in that article, didn't they.

And, instead of publishing the two cartoons in question, they describe them.

Let's see how they cover this.

 

September 19, 2012:

Q The French government has decided to temporarily close their embassies and schools in several Muslim countries after a satirical weekly, Charlie Hebdo, that published cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad. Is the White House concerned that those cartoons might further fan the flames in the region?

MR. CARNEY: Well, we are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory. But we’ve spoken repeatedly about the importance of upholding the freedom of expression that is enshrined in our Constitution.

In other words, we don’t question the right of something like this to be published; we just question the judgment behind the decision to publish it. And I think that that’s our view about the video that was produced in this country and has caused so much offense in the Muslim world.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...ess-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-91912

 

I'm sure this will receive 100000000X the attention of the terrorist attack at NAACP headquarters.

 

So is needing to consistently and vehemently disagree with things like that.

 

I have no problem with anyone who vehementry disagrees with purposeful stupidity.

 

So will Yasmin Bleeth.

 

Given that at least a dozen people were massacred vs. No one hurt or injured, it should. Do you honestly think they have the same news value?

(A perfect example of what I'm talking about, MC.)