Love is stronger than hate

UNDAUNTED by the November 2 attack on its offices – and threats of having “God’s curse” on it – French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo has produced another cover bound to fire up swivel-eyed Islamic fanatics.

The latest cover  declares “Love is stronger than hate” and depicts a Muslim man and a Charlie Hebdo cartoonist engaged in some heavy French-kissing.

The American site Gawker, under the headline World’s Ballsiest Magazine Puts a Gay Muhammed on its Cover, predicts:

This is not going to end well.

Charlie Hebdo received a gift of a Molotov cocktail, which totally gutted its editorial offices, after publishing an edition “guest edited” by the “Prophet” Mohammed. The cartoon had Big Mo saying:

100 lashes if you are not dying of laughter.

The magazine’s website hijacked after the attack by Turkish hackers, who left a threatening message reading:

You keep abusing Islam’s almighty Prophet with disgusting and disgraceful cartoons using excuses of freedom of speech…Be God’s Curse On You! We Will be Your Curse on Cyber World!

Despite Gawker’s headline, The Guardian  – which, like most mainstream UK publications – did not reproduce either of the “offensive” covers, insists that:

There is no suggestion that the character on the magazine cover is Muhammad.

The paper also pointed out that after the firebombing, French Muslim groups who had been highly critical of Charlie Hebdo condemned the destruction of its offices. Dalil Boubakeur head of the Paris Mosque, told journalists:

I am extremely attached to the freedom of the press, even if the press is not always tender with Muslims, Islam or the Paris Mosque.

Hat tip: Name Withheld

33 responses to “Love is stronger than hate”

  1. barriejohn says:

    Have you read the priceless comment that somebody called AZQ has posted on the original thread?

  2. Barry Duke says:

    Here it is, in all its glory, BarrieJohn:

    I’m really surprised how people defend the magazine side based on what they believe is “a freedom of expression”! What if the magazine expressed you or you father, or any of your family members as bad as you can imagine, would you still think its a freedom of expression? Be biased, and leave the hate of Muslims aside and speak judgmentally about what is wrong and what is right! I think the reason why some of us hates Muslims is that we believe anything we read, see without thinking by our minds. I knew some great Muslims friends back at the University, they were better than some us in terms of manners! Stop judging emotionally and judge mentally and wisely based on facts not news articles!

    Bottom line, they have the right to object on any offense that apppear on their relegion.

  3. tony e says:


    Stop being a pathetic guilt ridden apologist and grow a spine.

  4. ZombieHunter says:

    The french often get a lot of shit for being cowards and this just proves that when it comes to dealing with rugbutting nutjobs the french have more balls than most of the countries who take the piss out of them.

  5. barriejohn says:

    Tony: I did reply, but I somehow doubt that he will be back!

    Total rubbish, AZQ. You need your brain read.

    “What if the magazine expressed you or you father, or any of your family members as bad as you can imagine, would you still think its a freedom of expression?” Of course. Whyever not?

    “Bottom line, they have the right to object on any offense that apppear on their relegion.” Who said that they can’t? But they’re bloody firebombing offices and physically intimidating people. You sound as petulant and immature as these pathetic Mohammedans yourself!

  6. Anonymous says:

    Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s essay

    Will Latest “Muhammad” Firebombing Cause More Self-Censorship?

    A measure of the acceptance of a minority religion is to include them in the realm of public humour. As long as the majority is uncomfortable with that the minority remains outsiders. So in between the lines of Crumley’s piece is the message that Muslims, in general, are violent, so it is better not to provoke them; for they will never be part of the majority so let’s give them special treatment. What sounds like a well-intentioned and honorable message is, if you think about it, in fact denigrating and racist.

  7. Angela_K says:

    Well done Charlie Hebdo. The only way to defeat all religions – extremist or not – is to keep pointing and laughing. I’m ashamed of our mainstream media here [UK] and elsewhere who are utterly spineless when it comes to criticism of islam.

  8. David Anderson says:

    Ah yes, Turkey that great secular country and supporter of the free press.
    How do these people know that those cartoons suppose to be Mohammed? Wouldn’t he be blonde and blue eyed just like his amigo Jebus?

  9. Broga says:

    The prophet of the omnipotent and omniscient god of the Universe needs to be defended by a bunch of criminal bombers? Somehow it just doesn’t add up. But then religion never does.

  10. tony e says:


    You’ve put it more succinctly than I could.

  11. Chris says:

    I learn today from Wales Online that a Welsh Muslim was caught recently having sex with a young sheep. In his defence, he said it was islam and he could do whatever he liked with it……

  12. Anonymous says:

    Nice. The Daily Beast did a whole slideshow of Charlie Hebdo covers

  13. Broga says:

    The feeling of offense is subjective. So the more sensitive – or deluded – one is about their faith the more comments and actions come within the offense band. However, not only is the feeling of offense subjective but it is flexible. What was offensive in the past is not necessarily offensive today. In Tudor times the King changed what was offensive according to what suited him. Today, apart from some sad people, blasphemy is not a burning offense.

    The more we yield to the easily offended the more they will push and try to gain ground. The more we resist the more they will become familiar with, and accepting of, what they once regarded as outrageous.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Chris, when making a claim like that, provide documentation or keep it to yourself.

  15. remigius says:

    Er Anonymous. It was obviously a play on words and not meant to be taken literally, hence no links or citations etc.

    Young sheep. Islam. His lamb. Geddit?

  16. stargraves says:

    @Anonymous – LOL

    Are you an idiot? Chris should provide documentation? What, to explain to you a silly, pun-based JOKE?

    Get a grip. Re-read it out loud perhaps. *FACEPALM*

  17. Anonymous says:

    Are you an idiot?

    Sometimes, yes. My apologies, Chris.

    (In my defense, I live in the land of Fox news commenters.)

  18. remigius says:

    Anonymous. Here’e one for ya…

    Warning – when I got to the bit about the bread crumbs I blew coffee through my nose.

  19. AngieRS says:

    Well done, Charlie Hebdo, shame our lot haven’t the same courage.

  20. JohnMWhite says:

    There’s something unseemly about British newspapers commenting on the dreadful firebombing and intimidation of their overseas colleagues for exercising their freedom of expression and yet not exercising that freedom themselves, apparently for fear of getting their offices blown up. It’s a bit like an abused spouse gossiping about how their abused friend won’t ever call the police or get help, then going home to the exact same situation.

    It is good to see the Paris Mosque cry foul on these sorts of attacks, and to respect the rights of the press to make satirical commentary without fear of violent reprisals. Somehow, it appears the UK press does not actually think that is the case though – they are playing into the idea that there is, and therefore should be, something to fear.

  21. David Anderson says:

    remigius: The socks did it for me.

  22. Don says:

    Good for them, sticking to their guns.

  23. Broga says:

    @Anonymous: Great response. You redeemed yourself with that.

  24. chrsbol says:

    What a great sheep tail.
    I’ve added a box of breadcrumbs to the weekly shopping list.
    For the wife honestly.

  25. AgentCormac says:

    You’ve got to hand it to them for making a stand. And I think the tack they’ve taken on the front cover is genius – either you’re for love, or you’re for hate. Interesting that some followers of the ‘religion of love’ are already showing their true colours.

  26. Frank Kone says:

    If I was in the neighbourhood of that magazine, it would be my pleasure and honor to have my shotgun at the ready in case of an “incident”. So much courage deserves to be fought for!

  27. Graham Martin-Royle says:

    Bottom line, they have the right to object on any offense that apppear on their relegion.

    Fine, object, be offended but, don’t resort to violence and don’t try to force your rules onto me.

  28. jay says:

    I fully stand with Charlie Hebdo with this one and I’m glad to see the general support here.

    What bothers me is that some months back, when that fundie wacko was threatening to burn a Koran, I was almost alone on several atheist/freethought boards when I strongly defended him. I got so much flak about his ‘irresponsibility’, some even going as far as to suggest some moral (not legal) guilt for the subsequent killing of UN workers.

    Free speech, offensive free speech needs to be defended regardless of the motivations of the speakers.

  29. Stuart W says:

    I wonder what a fly on the wall would have heard at meetings where the revenge attackers made their plans.
    “How dare they make these evil cartoons that mock our beautiful religion as one in which savage violence is used to mete out punishment… let’s bomb them.”
    I just give up.

  30. Robster says:

    Thank god the muzzie bombers and their ilk have only threatened the wrath of god/allah on the good people of Charlie Hebdo magazine as opposed to real action. As we all know, god/allah doesn’t actually do anything, so any wrath of god/allah will probably be undetectable. Therefore, as nasty as the threats maybe construed, they are really pretend threats and are not worth worrying about.

  31. barriejohn says:

    This is funny, but even more amusing is the open warfare taking place in the comments thread. They are opposed to Muslim violence, but think that the artist needs a slap (or more), and the penny seems to have dropped with some that it’s perfectly OK to attack Islam on that site, but posters need to be careful what they say about other religions – especially Christianity (and he might have added Judaism!).

  32. Ex Patriot says:

    I totally back the4 Magazine in what they have done, screw the muslims and their 10th century religion, but I would say the same about the xians and their bull shit religion also.all religion is nothig more than mythology