At the request of some of your classmates, read the following article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/08/opinion/the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-in-paris.html?ref=opinion
Answer the following questions based on the article:
1. Explain the events that took place at Charlie Hebdo this past week.
2. Who is Francois Hollande? In regards to Islam, what did he have to say about these attacks?
3. Who is Marine Le Pen? How does the writer claim that she has taken advantage of the attacks?
4. What is xenophobia?
5. Who is Dalil Boubakeur? What did he have to say about the attacks?
6. The writer claims that some people accuse Charlie Hebdo of "tempting the ire of Islamic extremists one too many times." What are your thoughts? Did the cartoonists bring this attack on themselves, even to a small degree, by publishing something that they knew would be controversial?
7. How offensive should cartoonists, satirists, and comedians be able to be in the name of comedy? Who should regulate them?
Lynsey Simpson:
ReplyDelete1. A brutal terrorist attack on a newsletter place, killing 12 people.
2. The president of France, and it was an assault on their expression of freedom and their republic spirit.
3. Leader of the National Front party, said it was denial and hypocrisy about Islamic fundamentalism.
4. fear of things that are foreign or strange to you.
5. rector of the Grand Mosque in Paris, he thought the act was a declaration of war.
6. No, because even though they said controversial things, you can choose not to read it. If someone wrote something about my religion, and I knew they were opinionated very strongly, I probably wouldn't read it. Islam overreacted, they were just opinions, not something to murder people over.
7. it's very difficult to limit someone to what creativity extent they can go to, and who can limit them to what they create. It's just a matter of author opinion, if they feel they're stepping over the line a bit, then maybe they could back track and come up with something less offensive, but from a country that goes through hate everyday on social media and things like that, it shouldn't have been out of the ordinary that someone was poking some fun at them. they definitely over reacted to someone just putting out funny content for a small laugh.
Troy Banks
ReplyDelete1. Two gunmen infiltrated the headquarters of satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, leaving 12 dead, including two police officers.
2. He is the president of France, an he says that people should not "lump together" terrorists and Muslims.
3. She is the leader of the National Front Party. The writer claims that she has attempted to make political gains with talk of denial and hypocrisy in Islamic Fundamentalism.
4. The intense and/or irrational fear or distaste towards other countries.
5. He is the rector of the Grand Mosque in Paris, and he says that this is a "deafening declaration of war."
6. No. After all, it's a satirical newspaper .
7. They should be as offensive as they wish, and only they should be able to regulate how offensive their material is. If you can be offended, then you deserve to be offended.
Reagan Ross.
ReplyDelete1) due to some comics poking fun at the Islamics, there was a terrorist attack I suppose seeking revenge.
2) the articicle stated: "President François Hollande, speaking from outside the magazine’s office a couple of hours after the murder of 12 people, was crystal clear: This was an assault, he said, on “the expression of freedom” that is the “spirit of the republic.”
3) the leader of the National Front party: she has made political gains stoking anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim fears, and immediately sought political advantage with talk of “denial and hypocrisy” about “Islamic fundamentalism.”
4) the unreasoned fear of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange.
5) the rector of the Grand Mosque in Paris; “This is a deafening declaration of war"
6) I think this was taken out of hand. I believe everyone thinks that, actually. they should be able to express their thoughts of something even if it be negatively without getting killed. sure, they may have brought tension or anger upon themselves, but not death.
7) this answer may seem contradictory due to my response so number 6. but, if it's going to anger or hurt somebody, don't say it. if you blatantly know it will have consequences, even if it's just the other person being offended, don't do it, unless you're willing to deal with the outcome. that's how far it should go, to the limits of where it doesn't do any real harm.
MacKenzie Jones
ReplyDelete1.) Some of the writers at Charlie Hebdo, a newspaper company in Paris, wrote some thing about the Islamic/Muslim religion. That causing terrorists to target and attack them.
2.) He is the president of France and he stated that it was a "Assault on the expression of freedom that is the spirit of the republic."
3.) She's the leader of the National Front Party. She spoke of denial and hypocrisy about Islamic fundamentalism.
4.) Hate or fear of foreigners or anything foreign.
5.) He is the rector of the Grand Mosque, and said "This is a deafening declaration of war."
6.) Yes, honestly they did because I feel that the whole "free speech" line was passed when they turned it into such vulgar and hateful things. They didn't really have to go and kill people but they authors one way or another basically provoked them to be honest. If it can possibly offend many people then you better be expecting some kind of out lash. Free speech wasn't meant to be able to hurt or offend others so they shouldn't have said things like that for the public eye to see if they didn't want to get crap about it.
7.) If its for all of the public eye to see then really not at all... because obviously no one should take a risk like that again. It will happen again if people continue to do this. There are people out there that when you offend them or something they stand for they will go to the extreme to get back at you.
Kat Phillips
ReplyDelete1. there was a terrorist attack at a french newspaper in france this week and 12 people were killed
2. the president and he said they were attacked because of the expression of freedom
3. she is writer
4. intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries
5.current rector of the Great Mosque of Paris.
6. no i mean they were harmless and just a little thing that people do all the time it dosent mean that they should be killed
7. i mean i think for some it is a way to express themself and in no way a threat so i dont think so .
Kayla Fincher
ReplyDelete1. 2 armed attackers were sitting around a table on a late Wednesday morning for an editorial meeting, forced themselves into charlie hedbo's office shot an killed 10 people and injured 11.
2. president of the company he asked the public to avoid the temptation to “lump together” terrorists with Muslims, and he called for a united front against terrorism
3.leader of the National Front party, she has made political gains stoking anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim fears.
4. fear and hate towards foreigners
5.the rector of the Grand Mosque in Paris, that This was a deafening declaration of war
6.in a way but not really because they shouldn't have published something they knew would be so controversial or make other people angry at their company
7. if it is going to offend someone it shouldn't be published end of story just like you wouldn't make fun of someones religion in front of them its just disrespectful and wrong
Emily Keller
ReplyDelete1) there was a massacre that killed 12 people at a newspaper headquarters over an offensive cartoon about Allah
2) the current president of France, he said it is not good to lump Muslim and terrorist together.
3) she is the leader of the National Front party, shes using the tax to spread anti-muslin fears
4) it is an intense or irrational fear of people from different countries
5) he is a member of the clergy at the Grand Mosque in Paris, he said its a deafening declaration of war
6) i don't think so because they didn't just target Islam. they equally attacked many other major religions like Christianity and Judaism. the newspaper was meant to be controversial, that was its purpose to stir up drama. yet this is still no reason to kill people.
7) because we have freedom of speech there really is no way to regulate the offensive things people say. like the saying "i am charlie" meaning we have freedoms, to say what we want, to practice religion if you want to, to be who we want. yes i do think the cartoons were offensive, but that is my opinion. other people might find the cartoons funny and that's their opinion. violence should never be a resolution to differentiating opinions. I can proudly say that i am charlie.
Carter Billings 3rd 1.The French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo was attacked by two armed gunmen. The gunmen went into the office and opened fire killing ten staff members, two police officers, and injuring at least eleven others. 2.Francois Hollande is the president of France and he said the attacks were an assault on the expression of freedom that is the spirit of the republic. 3.Marine Le Pen is the leader of the national front party and the writer claims that she has taken advantage by talking about denial and hypocrisy about Islamic feudalism. 4.Xenophobia is the fear of people from other countries. 5.Dalil Boubakeur is the rector of the Grand Mosque in Paris and he said this is a very loud declaration for war. 6. The job as a writer deals with things that will make others angry, and this intensifies with cartoonists and religion. Cartoonist do the stories as they see them, and by doing this they make others angry, but no I don't think that they are responsible just for showing their views they were killed. This world is a place of speech people will say what they think every time and that will anger people, but they should not have to change their views to appease others and they should definitely not have to die for their views. 7. They can say what they want, but should know the farther they go the more it angers people and motivates them to do something bad. The only people that should regulate them is their self.
ReplyDeleteSydney Emmons 3rd pd.
ReplyDelete1. A couple of terrorists shot cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo because they didnt like the cartoons they were publishing. They considered them offensive.
2. French President. He said this incident assaulted freedom of expression.
3. Leader of National Front party. She is starting Anti-Muslim beliefs and spreading it around.
4. Fear or dislike of people from different countries.
5. Rector of the Grand Mosque in France.He claims that this is a declaration for war.
6. Well, the cartoonists have freedom of expression but they shouldve had better judgment because they knew there are crazy people out in the world that have the ability to harm. So, it's kind of their fault for not being more careful in our day and age but it would be nice if we had the security of being able to express our freedom without worrying about terrorists, but sadly we do not..
7. I think it is too far when the comedian/cartoonist starts making fun of different peoples religion, gender, culture, race, etc. Because this can be taken personal by many people and cause altercations among them. However, if the cartoonists/comedians want to be bold and make fun of other people then they have the right, but a law (freedom of expression) does not guarantee full safety if someone gets angry about it.
James Smelley
ReplyDelete1. Two armed gunmen fired into a group of people in France working on a satirical magazine. Ten people were killed.
2. The president of France. He said that it was an assault on the expression of freedom.
3. The leader of the National Front party. She is turning it into a reason to increase anti-immigration laws.
4. A fear of people from other countries. (Or extra-terrestrial beings.)
5. The rector of the Great Mosque in Paris. He said that his people were in anguish over it and that it was a declaration of war.
6. I do not think anything should happen over these cartoons, because people should not be stupid and they should not pay attention to them. However, people are going to be stupid, so Charlie Hebdo should have expected some kind of controversy. Probably not as far as a shooting, though.
7. Comedians should be as offensive as they deem safe. No one should regulate them except for themselves.
Makenzie Taylor
ReplyDelete1) Two armed men forced themselves into Charlie Hebdo's office and shot ten people dead. They also killed two policemen and wounded eleven others. They then drove away with a third accomplice.
2) Francois Hollande is the president of France. He said to not lump together Muslims with terrorists, and to become a united front against terrorists.
3) Marine Le Pen is the leader of the National Front Party. The writer say that she talked of "denial and hypocrisy" about "Islamic Fundamentalism".
4) Xenophobia is when you have a strong dislike or fear of people from other countries.
5) Dalil Boubakeur is the rector of the Grand Mosque in Paris. He says the attack was a "declaration of war".
6) Charlie Hebdo probably upsets everybody with some of the religious and political figures he includes in his cartoons. I don't think he should have to hold back or sugar coat some of his cartoons though. It would be a terrible thing to have a great idea that is hilarious and you love it and you know others would love it too. Then, you think "Oh. Well, maybe I shouldn't" because you are afraid of the consequences. He was doing something he loved and was able to express himself in.
7) No one should regulate them. If there would be any "regulators" it would need to be the consumers. The writers and comedians will change their material according to what the people like and what will sell.
Micaela Tierce 1st
ReplyDelete1.) The narrator of the article and former cartoonist for The Baltimore City Paper. He is a journalist and cartoonist.
2.)The two items mentioned are the Sony Movie " The Interview" and the massacre at Charlie Hebdo in Paris.
3.) Charlie Hebdo was a massacre of cartoonists who made derogative comments towards Isis and were then later ambushed for them and killed for Isis members. It is so big on the news right now because anytime Isis does something drastic it affects every country affected by this movement that needs to be stopped.
4.) The author claims that cartoonists have not had freedom for 140 years after someone portrayed George W Bush as a " dung flinging" monkey. Cartoonists are restricted by American Capitalism in not what they can say, but how far they can take what they say.
5.) Although I don't agree with the way the cartoonists handled their opinions over Isis, I don't think they should hold any blame for what happened. They exercised their freedom of speech and that is their right to do so. People can not live their lives in fear over " what ifs" and I feel we may try to place blame in situations like this to hide the real problem that is at stake. As human beings we don't like to think that other humans could do such horrible things for no real reasons except their beliefs. Nobody asks to die, so I feel like the cartoonists should have been able to draw what they want because they didn't ask to die and that gave no right for those people to kill them.
6.) Our basic rights state that we should have freedom of press, but that is not the case. I understand why the government would like to control the press, but we as citizens should have the right to know what is going on. I think satirists and comics should practice their liberty while also using common sense. Comedians do get away with so much more than satirists because in comedy their audience is not as widespread as newspapers, and they do not in most cases get as much attention.
Josie Parham
ReplyDelete1- a terrorist attack;2 armed men broke into a meeting and killed 12 people
2- the president; they were on the expression of freedom and the spirit of the republic
3- leader of the national front party; talk of denial and hypocrisy about Islamic fundamentalism.
4- strong dislike for people of other countries
5- the rector of the grand mosque in Paris; he said it was a deafening declaration of war
6- I think that we do have freedom of speech and people will have different opinions and the attackers went to far. People will voice their opinion more than others but that doesn't mean that we should shoot everyone that disagrees with us.
7- I think that since we have freedom of speech and expression so i feel that if we regulate it it will only bring more controversy because the government will be pushing too much power over us.
Emily Perry:
ReplyDelete1. A brutal terrorist attack occurred at the magazine company Charlie Hedbo in Paris, France. The terrorists knew where the staff would be on that Wednesday and broke into the office and killed 10 people.Two policeman were also killed.
2. President; an attack on freedom
3. Leader of the national Front Party; yes she did
4. intense dislike or fear of people from other countries
5. rector of Grand Mosque in France; "This a deafening declaration of war."
6. yes: if they put something on the market of that kind then they may have brought it on upon themselves.
7. I think they should not be able to use other countries as forms of mockery or disrespect because that can cause many many problems with the society as a whole.
Shalyn Dale
ReplyDelete1. This week at Charlie Hebdo, 12 people were murdered and 11 were injured.
2. The president of France. He said the attacks were fueled off hate .
3. Marine Le Pen is the leader of the National Front party. She's using what happened for political gain .
4. Intense or irrational fear of people from other countries.
5. Dalil Boubakeur, the rector of the Grand Mosque in Paris, said “This is a deafening declaration of war,”
6. Yes and no, they knew it would be controversial but they shouldn't be killed for expressing their opinion.
7. As offensive as they want to be . No one should regulate any one else's way of expressing themselves .
Abbey Kate Gregory
ReplyDelete1. there was a shooting at the newspaper in paris france
2. the president and that they were shoot because of the practice of their comics
3. a writer and using them to alert everyone one else of the possible outcomes
4. an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange.
5.current rector of the Great Mosque of Paris
6. not at all they dont deserve to be killed because they practiced one of their freedoms
7.i think that for some people it is a expression of their feelings so i dont think they should be stopped just like the poetry scenario.
It is excellent that you brought the previous discussion into this. Great job!
DeleteAlex Turner 3rd Period
ReplyDelete1. A terrorist attack that killed 12 people
2. President, said it was an act of freedom
3. Leader of the national front party. she used it by Islamic fundamentalism
4. fear of people who do not belong in your country
5.the rector of the grand Mosque in paris
6.i think people are going to try and blame anything that would cause conflict i personally dont think it was the cartoonist fault
7.i think there should be a limitation and comedy and too far but also it will appeal to whoever its your opinion to feel that way.
Grace Singley
ReplyDelete1. There was a terrorists attack and two heavily armed attackers went into a newspaper place and killed 12 people.
2. hes the president and he says that it was a physical attack on the expression of freedom.
3. the leader of the national front party, she is going with anti immigrants and anti-muslim.
4. fear of people who don't belong to your country.
5. the rector of the grand mosque in Paris and he said this is a deafening declaration declaration of wars.
6. I think they can publish whatever they want but they should think about the consequences.
7. I think they should again do whatever they want to do but have the end in mind and think whats going to happen before they publish something. and I think they should regulate themselves and check themselves.