Double Standards of France - Hara-Kiri Hebdo vs Charlie Hebdo

[syedali73]

Hara-Kiri Hebdo was a weekly satirical magazine began to publish in 1969. It is a lesser known fact that Hara-Kiri Hebdo was the forbearer of Charlie Hebdo, which started to publish following a permanent and life-long ban on Hara-Kiri Hebdo in 1970.

In November 1970, following the death of the President of France Charles de Gaulle in Colombey-les-Deux-Églises, the weekly Hara-Kiri Hebdo published the headline "Bal tragique à Colombey : 1 mort" (in English: "Tragic ball in Colombey: 1 death").

The choice of the heading denotes to a tragedy of the same month, a fire at a discothèque that had claimed 146 lives. The chosen heading was conceived as derogatory, a cheap attempt of downplaying the gravity of Charles de Gaulle's tragic death, by suggesting a comparison with a tragedy which had just earlier claimed many lives. The people and government of France took this editorial choice as a deliberate felony of lèse-majesté against the deceased President. As a result, the Hara-Kiri Hebdo was immediately and permanently banned. Charlie Hebdo was started immediately afterwards.

My question is, where was the freedom of press and free speech when Hara-Kiri Hebdo was permanently banned?

@Areesh @Akheilos @Bratva @Donatello @forcetrip @Gufi @HRK @Horus @Jango @Jungibaaz @MastanKhan @niaz @Rafael @RescueRanger @Secur @Slav Defence @TankMan @WebMaster

 

[RescueRanger]

One rule for one and one for the other. Freedom of speech my left foot!

 

[Gufi]

The issue is very simple where freedom of speech is a concept that the west can use to only their advantage. There are multiple examples where freedom of speech has been denied because it is deemed offensive. The whole issue of freedom of speech was a concept to overturn the censorship which prevailed in ancient Europe. It was meant to empower and not to insult, to ask meaningful questions, not for jokes, and to make society more cohesive and free from constant checks.

 

[Roybot]

One rule for one and one for the other. Freedom of speech my left foot!

Yeah except that Hara Kiri Hebdo incident happened in 1969, and Charlie Hebdo in 2014, close to half a century after. People evolve, societies evolve, their tolerance evolves. But some people and societies would rather be stuck in the stone age.

 

[syedali73]

Yeah except that Hara Kiri Hebdo incident happened in 1969, and Charlie Hebdo in 2014, close to half a century after. People evolve, societies evolve their tolerance evolves. But some people and societies would rather be stuck in the stone age.

So it begins....

Perumal Murugan's novel Madhorubhagan (English version 'One Part Woman') was banned in India in, not 50 years ago, not even 10 years ago, but, well in 2015. Why was it banned? Right-wing Hindus alleged that Murugan had portrayed the Kailasanathar temple in Tiruchengode and its women devotees in bad light. ....people and societies would rather be stuck in the stone age...

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Hara-Kiri Hebdo was a weekly satirical magazine began to publish in 1969. It is a lesser known fact that Hara-Kiri Hebdo was the forbearer of Charlie Hebdo, which started to publish following a permanent and life-long ban on Hara-Kiri Hebdo in 1970.

In November 1970, following the death of the President of France Charles de Gaulle in Colombey-les-Deux-Églises, the weekly Hara-Kiri Hebdo published the headline "Bal tragique à Colombey : 1 mort" (in English: "Tragic ball in Colombey: 1 death").

The choice of the heading denotes to a tragedy of the same month, a fire at a discothèque that had claimed 146 lives. The chosen heading was conceived as derogatory, a cheap attempt of downplaying the gravity of Charles de Gaulle's tragic death, by suggesting a comparison with a tragedy which had just earlier claimed many lives. The people and government of France took this editorial choice as a deliberate felony of lèse-majesté against the deceased President. As a result, the Hara-Kiri Hebdo was immediately and permanently banned. Charlie Hebdo was started immediately afterwards.

My question is, where was the freedom of press and free speech when Hara-Kiri Hebdo was permanently banned?

@Areesh @Akheilos @Bratva @Donatello @forcetrip @Gufi @HRK @Horus @Jango @Jungibaaz @MastanKhan @niaz @Rafael @RescueRanger @Secur @Slav Defence @TankMan @WebMaster

Yes, happened half a century back.

Ok, freedom of expression has limits. But THE FRENCH will decide those limits and NOT YOU. Got it?

 

[RescueRanger]

Yeah except that Hara Kiri Hebdo incident happened in 1969, and Charlie Hebdo in 2014, close to half a century after. People evolve, societies evolve their tolerance evolves. But some people and societies would rather be stuck in the stone age.

Come again... And which society and people would that be? Because as far as I am aware the world is not flat and the moon is not bashe and the sun is not anu...

 

[Roybot]

So it begins....

I guess you have nothing to refute? Why start a debate when you are not willing to hear the opposing views? Oh wait I know why!

 

[RescueRanger]

NOT YOU. Got it?

He never said HE is deciding anything... GOT IT?

 

[SarthakGanguly]

He never said HE is deciding anything... GOT IT?

Oh, so this is only for selfless General Knowledge? A fact finding mission? Ok, Nice.

 

[RescueRanger]

Oh, so this is only for selfless General Knowledge? A fact finding mission? Ok, Nice.

It's called a "Debate" if you can't comprehend that, than ram be with you.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

And which society and people would that be?

The Islamic migrant society. He is somewhat politically correct, perhaps.

It's called a "Debate" if you can't comprehend that, than ram be with you.

Yes, I can see that. syedali's intentions are noble and I appreciate that. It's a very effective form of debate as well. His post - 'Now it begins...' says a lot. Very relevant and apt.
Also let's wait for his next opinion. It would be interesting to see how he proceeds without dragging some Hindu/Buddhist thing down with him.*

Right-wing Hindus alleged that Murugan had portrayed the Kailasanathar temple in Tiruchengode and its women devotees in bad light

And then we went ahead and killed the author, publishers and also added four or five Jews to the kill list. Oh wait, no, we did not do that.

Drawing a parallel between drawing cartoons, banning a magazine and butchering the cartoonists in daylight is not offensive, it is criminal.

EDIT*: Oh wait, he has already done that.

 

[Roybot]

So it begins....

Perumal Murugan's novel Madhorubhagan (English version 'One Part Woman') was banned in India in, not 50 years ago, not even 10 years ago, but, well in 2015. Why was it banned? Right-wing Hindus alleged that Murugan had portrayed the Kailasanathar temple in Tiruchengode and its women devotees in bad light. ....people and societies would rather be stuck in the stone age...

So was Satanic Verses and so was The Da Vinci Code, the movie, but we are not discussing India or Hindus here are we? Derail your own thread, genius

 

[RescueRanger]

The Islamic migrant society. He is somewhat politically correct, perhaps.


Yes, I can see that. syedali's intentions are noble and I appreciate that. It's a very effective form of debate as well. His post - 'Now it begins...' says a lot. Very relevant and apt.


And then we went ahead and killed the author, publishers and also added four or five Jews to the kill list. Oh wait, no, we did not do that.

Drawing a parallel between drawing cartoons, banning a magazine and butchering the cartoonists in daylight is not offensive, it is criminal.

BUT we are not the "ISLAMIC" migrant society and that condescending post of yours it only highlights your insecurity, no need to be shy spit out what your tarnished heart wants to say, at least be man enough to stand by your words rather than pussyfooting up and down.

This is not the EU, no one is going to sue you for saying what you feel

 

[SarthakGanguly]

So was Satanic Verses, but we are not discussing India or Hindus here are we? Derail your own thread, genius

I for one guessed rightly(see above) that he would be dragging at least the Hindus. It's unfortunate but not unexpected.

BUT we are not the "ISLAMIC" migrant society and that condescending post of yours it only highlights your insecurity, no need to be shy spit out what your tarnished heart wants to say, at least be man enough to stand by your words rather than pussyfooting up and down.

This is not the EU, no one is going to sue you for saying what you feel

That post is not directed towards you. It was not directed to Muslims in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc.

It is aimed at Islamic societies in Australia, Germany, France, USA, etc. I am perfectly secure in my beliefs and I am speaking as openly as I am thinking. You can go ahead and draw some Gods on a piece of cloth and sell. I may be offended(may be not, depends on your drawing skills). But I won't kill. Ever. There is absolutely no disconnect.