131
this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2024
131 points (99.2% liked)
Slop.
356 readers
1 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/gossip
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean yeah, but that's not really relevant to anything he was saying. Let's not do vaguely 'do you condemn Hamas' stuff to comrades. Maybe that's not what you intended, but that's how it reads.
Not saying that this necessarily justifies anything, but a lot of the content put out by Charlie Hebdo was just straight up racist and could not possibly be interpreted in any other way. The idea that all they did was mock religion got heavily pushed by the media after the attack, but it simply isn't true.
Oh, I definitely wouldn't think you would! I just think it's worth pointing out as there are still a lot of people who aren't aware of it.
Unless I missed an edit, I don't see anything like that being said or implied, that's all, so it read to me as introducing the Hebdo shootings as an oddly undermining non-sequitar.
I didn't assume that that was your intention, and I'm glad it wasn't. Maybe my 'between the lines' detector is a bit oversensative today. And I didn't mean to turn this into a tangent about the shootings (quite the opposite in fact), but oops I guess.
You're completely right. I just totally blanked on it. Apologies for that. I think I'm more exhausted than I realise.