Extremists open fire at Paris satirical newspaper, kill 12

[Vlad n U 2]

Heartwarming stuff, what a hero.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/wo...=tw-share&_r=0

[youarenotimmune]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

Heartwarming stuff, what a hero.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/wo...=tw-share&_r=0

Between this and the Muslim cop who was gunned down (http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/6437984), it is important to remember who the enemy is. The biggest victory for these lunatics is creating a wedge between the Muslim and Non-Muslim world. A lot of people seem to forget, or are unaware of, the fact that Muslim casualties significantly outnumber Non-Muslim casualties since the War on Terror started (most of them in Pakistan, as a result of either drone strikes or suicide bombings).

It's a frightening world right now. The lunatics are winning in more ways than many imagine.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by Vincent Vega

Don't want to digress from the topic, so trying to be short:
To me the argument in the article is a different one: One incident is immediately seen for what it is, terrorism, in the other the media and public is cautious and deliberating whether this might be just a disturbed person. The Paris attacks lead to yet another debate about Muslims in general, whereas the NAACP attack is met with a nuanced "Probably just a disturbed lunatic, nothing much to report about." And that creates an imbalance when talking about terrorism in general. And it leads to stereotyping.
Take England for example: In the 70s to 90s, if you came across Irish you had to expect people looking weird at you or becoming uncomfortable around you. The term terrorism was mentally linked to the IRA. Nowadays, terrorism can only be bearded, darker skinned guys. Case in point, Fox News: Fox Host: How Do We Spot 'Bad Guys' If We Don't Know 'Tone Of Their Skin'?

That's not really the same argument as saying, if you mention this, you also have to say this, that and that. Each is their own story. But both are a story.

The media showing bias in their reporting is not news.

It happens in every major news story there is. Most only notice it, though, if their side of the argument happens to be the side that particular news network isn't on.

The more liberal leaning networks so it just as often as Fox. They're just more subtle about it. Fox News? Not so subtle.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

Heartwarming stuff, what a hero.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/wo...=tw-share&_r=0

yeah that really got to me when i saw it on the news here yesterday, not only his heroic actions in the hostage situation but also the fact that he was working in a Jewish shop - gives us hope for humanity...

Originally Posted by youarenotimmune

Between this and the Muslim cop who was gunned down (Ahmed Merabet, Slain Muslim Police Officer, Honoured With #JeSuisAhmed), it is important to remember who the enemy is. The biggest victory for these lunatics is creating a wedge between the Muslim and Non-Muslim world. A lot of people seem to forget, or are unaware of, the fact that Muslim casualties significantly outnumber Non-Muslim casualties since the War on Terror started (most of them in Pakistan, as a result of either drone strikes or suicide bombings).

It's a frightening world right now. The lunatics are winning in more ways than many imagine.

thing is, anyone with a shred of intelligence would understand and be aware of this and would make the distinction... there are fundamentalists/extremists in every religion/belief who fuck things up for everyone else... as i have already said in this thread re. the situation in France, Muslims (not only those killed but the whole Muslim community here who are now living in fear of reprisals from imbeciles) were victims AND heros... the killers were just terrorists

in my kids' schools there are Catholics/Christians, Atheists, Jews and Muslims and friendship transcends those labels, they're just mates...

[Vincent Vega]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

The media showing bias in their reporting is not news.

It happens in every major news story there is. Most only notice it, though, if their side of the argument happens to be the side that particular news network isn't on.

The more liberal leaning networks so it just as often as Fox. They're just more subtle about it. Fox News? Not so subtle.

That's certainly true, which is why it needs a corrective pointing out when they are failing their self-proclaimed position of being the 4th power in the state.

Originally Posted by mama cass

thing is, anyone with a shred of intelligence would understand and be aware of this and would make the distinction... there are fundamentalists/extremists in every religion/belief who fuck things up for everyone else... as i have already said in this thread re. the situation in France, Muslims (not only those killed but the whole Muslim community here who are now living in fear of reprisals from imbeciles) were victims AND heros... the killers were just terrorists

in my kids' schools there are Catholics/Christians, Atheists, Jews and Muslims and friendship transcends those labels, they're just mates...

Though apparently there are a great number of people missing this intelligence, as proven by FN in France, UKIP, Wilders and all the other far rights parties which have support well in the double-digits. Or shown with the rise in Pegida demonstrators in Germany, more particularly in the part of Germany where almost no Muslims live, Saxonia. There is a general trend that people are most afraid of something where this something exists the least. E.g. in Germany, the more Muslims live in a state, the less respondents to surveys report they are afraid of Islam.

Also, I doubt those who have attacked mosques, or Muslims in a car, etc. even attempted to make the distinction between people of a certain faith, and extremists.

A great many, even those who have not fallen victim to the current "Muslim scare", are indeed very quick to say "Muslims", instead of "extremists", or tell Muslims things about their religion they already know, rendering them guilty by association.

The brother of Ahmed Merabet delivered a very moving and thoughtful public statement today: Paris policeman’s brother: ‘Islam is a religion of love. My brother was killed by terrorists, by false Muslims’ | World news | The Guardian

Very worthwhile list of who is attending today's solidarity march for freedom of press and freedom of speech: https://storify.com/tometty/staunch-...end-solidarity

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by Vincent Vega

That's certainly true, which is why it needs a corrective pointing out when they are failing their self-proclaimed position of being the 4th power in the state.

[/url]

The problem is that both sides only point it out when the narrative doesn't jive with their side of the debate.

[Galeongirl]

Anyone watched the march today? Damn impressive, about 1,5 million people in Paris and even more all over the country.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Vincent Vega

Though apparently there are a great number of people missing this intelligence, as proven by FN in France, UKIP, Wilders and all the other far rights parties which have support well in the double-digits.

yeah... which was why i said "anyone with a shred of intelligence"

like Ian McKewan said (in the article i posted above), if they want to persecute Muslims, the best way for them to do so would be to join ISIS!

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Galeongirl

Anyone watched the march today? Damn impressive, about 1,5 million people in Paris and even more all over the country.

they're now saying around 3 million in Paris... it's amazing and so heartwarming... am so proud of France today...

i also went on a march today, locally... just amazing... such a huge turnout in our town, from all communities, and the local Imam spoke... incredible peaceful atmosphere, a mixture of hope, sadness and defiance... really hoping this will be a watershed moment in modern history...

obviously we can't forget that Charlie Hebdo was a thorn in the side of every political party, every religion in France with court cases from all round, and suffered greatly because of that, but they were an essential thorn in their side, to keep them down to earth and stay human... it's so great to see people coming together whatever their beliefs and politics and seeing the bigger picture...

[Vincent Vega]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

The problem is that both sides only point it out when the narrative doesn't jive with their side of the debate.

No doubt about it, but that doesn't necessarily lessen the validity of the news at hand.

Originally Posted by mama cass

yeah... which was why i said "anyone with a shred of intelligence"

Yes, but let's be realistic here. 25% support of FN, or UKIP, or Wilders cannot be argued away with they are just stupid. It's also not that miraculously the 18,000 morons of Germany happened to gather in Dresden. A lot of the people falling for the populist shit are people with academic degrees, managers in firms etc. who you'd consider reasonable conversation partners if you met them.

Such attitudes can also be found in the US, just like anywhere, where people being asked about Islam often times confuse the religion with the acts of the terrorists.
American Perceptions of Muslims | Inside Islam
https://www.barna.org/barna-update/c...nk-about-islam

Such simplistic argumentation is no different than the anti-semitism displayed to this day.

If such large parts of society are lacking a "shred of intelligence" then we should admit that we have a problem in our societies that we need to address.

The fears of these imams is not entirely unfounded. The general atmosphere in Europe has become quite tense over the past year, I'd say, with completely irrational fears about Muslims due to ISIS in Syria, but also confusion in the current Ukraine conflict and the diplomatic crisis with Russia.

"France is our country, we have been here for three or even four generations, and we should not be afraid," he said as around one thousand of the faithful gathered to pray.

"To a cartoon you reply with a cartoon, to a drawing with a drawing, to a newspaper article with a newspaper article... But you don't reply with guns," said Mustafa Riad of the Union mosque in the southern city of Montpellier.

Muslim theologian Tareq Oubrou, an imam in Bordeaux, in the south-west, said Muslims were furious that their religion had been "confiscated by crazies... and uneducated, unbalanced people".

FEAR OF RISE IN HOSTILITY

Muslim leaders fear that the Charlie Hebdo attack will lead to further hostility and attacks against their community.

Prime Minister Manuel Valls insisted Friday that France was "in a war against terrorism", but not "against a religion", and President Francois Hollande appealed for a halt to emotive rhetoric and "stigmatisation and sorry caricaturing" of others.

Since Wednesday's attack, shot have been fired and grenades thrown at several Muslim places of worship without causing injuries.

French hostage crisis: French imams rail against 'crazies who have seized our religion' - Europe News & Top Stories - The Straits Times

[mama cass]

little bit more background info on Charlie Hebdo

On Charlie Hebdo: A letter to my British friends

extract:

Dear friends,



Three days ago, a horrid assault was perpetrated against the French weekly Charlie Hebdo, who had published caricatures of Mohamed, by men who screamed that they had “avenged the prophet”. A wave of compassion followed but apparently died shortly afterward and all sorts of criticism started pouring down the web against Charlie Hebdo, who was described as islamophobic, racist and even sexist. Countless other comments stated that Muslims were being ostracized and finger-pointed. In the background lurked a view of France founded upon the “myth” of laicité, defined as the strict restriction of religion to the private sphere, but rampantly islamophobic - with passing reference to the law banning the integral veil. One friend even mentioned a division of the French left on a presumed “Muslim question”.

As a Frenchman and a radical left militant at home and here in UK, I was puzzled and even shocked by these comments and would like, therefore, to give you a clear exposition of what my left-wing French position is on these matters.

Firstly, a few words on Charlie Hebdo, which was often “analyzed” in the British press on the sole basis, apparently, of a few selected cartoons. It might be worth knowing that the main target of Charlie Hebdo was the Front National and the Le Pen family. Next came crooks of all sorts, including bosses and politicians (incidentally, one of the victims of the bombing was an economist who ran a weekly column on the disasters caused by austerity policies in Greece). Finally, Charlie Hebdo was an opponent of all forms of organized religions, in the old-school anarchist sense: Ni Dieu, ni maître! They ridiculed the pope, orthodox Jews and Muslims in equal measure and with the same biting tone. They took ferocious stances against the bombings of Gaza. Even if their sense of humour was apparently inacceptable to English minds, please take my word for it: it fell well within the French tradition of satire – and after all was only intended for a French audience. It is only by reading or seeing it out of context that some cartoons appear as racist or islamophobic. Charlie Hebdo also continuously denounced the pledge of minorities and campaigned relentlessly for all illegal immigrants to be given permanent right of stay. I hope this helps you understand that if you belong to the radical left, you have lost precious friends and allies.

This being clear, the attack becomes all the more tragic and absurd: two young French Muslims of Arab descent have not assaulted the numerous extreme-right wing newspapers that exist in France (Minute, Valeurs Actuelles) who ceaselessly amalgamate Arabs, Muslims and fundamentalists, but the very newspaper that did the most to fight racism. And to me, the one question that this specific event raises is: how could these youth ever come to this level of confusion and madness? What feeds into fundamentalist fury? How can we fight it?

I think it would be scandalous to answer that Charlie Hebdo was in any way the cause of its own demise. It is true that some Muslims took offence at some of Charlie’s cartoons. Imams wrote in criticism of them. But the same Imams were on TV after the tragedy, expressing their horror and reminding everyone that words should be fought with words, and urging Muslims to attend Sunday’s rally in homage to Charlie Hebdo. As a militant in a party that is routinely vilified in the press, I don’t go shoot down the journalists whose words or pictures trigger my anger. It is a necessary consequence of freedom of expression that people might be offended by what you express: so what? Nobody dies of an offence.

Of course, freedom of speech has its limits. I was astonished to read from one of you that UK, as opposed to France, had laws forbidding incitement to racial hatred. Was it Charlie’s cartoons that convinced him that France had no such laws? Be reassured: it does. Only we do not conflate religion and race. We are the country of Voltaire and Diderot: religion is fair game. Atheists can point out its ridicules, and believers have to learn to take a joke and a pun. They are welcome to drown us in return with sermons about the superficiality of our materialistic, hedonistic lifestyles. I like it that way. Of course, the day when everybody confuses “Arab” with “Muslim” and “Muslim” with “fundamentalist”, then any criticism of the latter will backfire on the former. That is why we must keep the distinctions clear.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Vincent Vega

Yes, but let's be realistic here. 25% support of FN, or UKIP, or Wilders cannot be argued away with they are just stupid.

stupid, intolerant, ignorant - i'm sure there are loads of appropriate adjectives for them

[Vlad n U 2]

Frightening but not unsurprising to see world leaders with dubious records marching for "freedom of speech."

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

Frightening but not unsurprising to see world leaders with dubious records marching for "freedom of speech."

yeah... i'm sure there is room for cynicism... but... i just read a great article in Le Monde just now though, haven't got time to translate just yet, but here's the gist of some nice bits...

the surviving Charlie Hebdo team were at the front of the procession in Paris, and had one regret - they wished they were brandishing caricatures of Benyamin Nétanyahou, King Abdallah II of Jordan, Nicolas Sarkozy, the head of Russian diplomacy, Sergueï Lavrov, Turkish PM Ahmet Davutoglu, some of the figureheads CH had taken apart over the years... but said "never mind, we couldn't think of everything..." hehe

despite the tragic circumstances, the CH team couldn't help but crack up laughing when President Hollande came to greet them personally and a pigeon crapped on his shoulder

Patrick Pelloux, a member of the CH team, who was an A&E doctor and had a column with the magazine (who wasn't at the fateful meeting that morning but in another office nearby and rushed to the scene to try and tend the dying and injured) said something beautiful "The warmth of these people, united calmly for freedom of expression, it's the first day of something..."

the partner of one of the cartoonists who died said "It's surreal that everyone is with us. It's strange but beautiful" and couldn't get over the fact that two symbols have been able to bring heads of States together in unity: Mandela… and Charlie.


La famille «Charlie» : « Tout ce monde avec nous. C'est beau et c'est étrange »

i guess the wankers will always try to ride on the back of any situation, but sometimes it doesn't matter

[Vincent Vega]

Originally Posted by mama cass

stupid, intolerant, ignorant - i'm sure there are loads of appropriate adjectives for them

Ok, don't know about you, but I start feeling uncomfortable if I have to call a quarter of the society I live in stupid, intolerant or ignorant.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Vincent Vega

Ok, don't know about you, but I start feeling uncomfortable if I have to call a quarter of the society I live in stupid, intolerant or ignorant.

we're talking about the extreme right, right?

disturbing and worrying

out of interest, how would you describe them?


eta: here's an interesting article addressing some of these issues:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ty-and-freedom

My overwhelming feeling was: may this spirit of resistance last. May this be a tipping point of Never Again. May this also be the start of a reckoning. Not only for France, but also for a Europe where we know jihadi networks – however much of a minority they may be – are growing, and where populism and xenophobia are also on the rise.

How did it come to this ? Unlike 9/11, unlike the Nazi occupation, this was not an attack from afar, from beyond a nation’s borders. It was a murderous danger that appeared from within France. The fanatical, indoctrinated, armed Islamists who assassinated 17 people in Paris were young French nationals, they were born and educated in France. This key aspect goes a long way in explaining why there was such an outpouring of grief and anger, and the need to reclaim France’s identity by a show of grassroots democratic strength.

Just as important was the presence of many European leaders and officials. It was not only about solidarity, but about restating what Europe is supposed to be about: tolerance, fundamental rights, rule of law. The antidotes against war.

“Je suis Charlie, je suis flic, je suis Juif” – this was the best, the strongest and most complete slogan that demonstrators brandished. I am Charlie, I am the police, I am Jewish. The terrorist attack had indeed three dimensions. First, they targeted not only freedom of speech but the right of blasphemy. The Charlie Hebdo cartoons may not have pleased everyone but they were about exercising a right that the French revolution of 1789 introduced. Before that, blasphemy was a crime.

Nothing Charlie Hebdo did ever violated democratically entrenched rights. In 2007, when the satirical magazine was prosecuted by Muslim organisations in France for supposedly inciting hatred and insulting Islam and Muslims at large, the court ruled that the magazine, even if it ruffled sensitivities, had not gone beyond “the admissible limits of freedom of speech”.

Secondly, the gunmen targeted police officers, shooting three dead in cold blood. Doing so, they attacked those whose mission is to uphold the rule of law. This was an attack on an institution of the republic as much as on individuals who were risking their lives as they attempted to stop the assailants.

Thirdly, the jihadi fanatics went for Jews. They committed a massacre inside a kosher shop, and hours before the start of the sabbath, making sure there would be many customers at hand. So it happened that on French soil, French citizens assassinated Jews just because they were Jewish. It was a tragedy that could only reignite the memory of second world war horrors. And it came less than three years after a bloody antisemitic attack in the French city of Toulouse, where three children were killed in a Jewish school.

Beyond Sunday’s spectacular display of unity against terror, questions must be asked: was enough done, in recent years, to fight back against the evil phenomenon that is now so vocally condemned? Was there enough solidarity when Charlie Hebdo was criticised and attacked for daring blasphemy? Or when it was abusively labelled racist, or anti-Arab, in a manner that completely distorted the very spirit of this magazine rooted in France’s 1968 movement of leftwing, progressive, free thinking? Was there a sufficient understanding of what it meant when police officers, in some French suburbs for instance, were greeted with stones being thrown at them, or even guns being fired? Was there enough reckoning of why some Jewish people in France have felt threatened, or ill at ease, and with emigration to Israel growing? And has there been enough clarity about how France’s social fabric is challenged when an antisemitic show, that of the so-called comedian Dieudonné, gathers millions of positive messages on social media, much of this coming from young people? I fear not.

These are the questions that will have to be addressed. These are problems to which durable solutions will need to be found. Make no mistake. Everyone was mobilised, determined and emotional in Paris on Sunday, but the deeper fault lines of French society, and the weakness shown in the recent past by its political parties, governments and institutions in dealing with them, will not have disappeared in one day, not through the magical wand of a massive and necessary demonstration.

[Vincent Vega]

I don't know, are approximately 25% of French citizens extremely right? That's the support of Front National in France at the moment.

I'd say no, they are not all on the far right, but yet they feel comfortable in voting for a party that is (as they did in the last European elections, where FN received the majority of votes).

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Vincent Vega

I don't know, are approximately 25% of French citizens extremely right? That's the support of Front National in France at the moment.

I'd say no, they are not all on the far right, but yet they feel comfortable in voting for a party that is (as they did in the last European elections, where FN received the majority of votes).

you have to bear in mind that sometimes the FN is used as a protest vote in France, like in the European elections last year, and the general elections in 2002, and, some would say, in the last general elections, with the French basically scaring the shit out of the more moderate politicians and population, but then rallying together for the second and final round of the elections to stop the extreme right getting in... although it has been getting way too close for comfort, and is very worrying indeed...

it can be quite taboo here to admit voting for the FN in certain circles, and many people vote secretly for the FN, so it's very complex... however, people i know of personally who openly vote for the FN state anti-Europe, anti-arab, anti-muslim and anti-immigration reasons, "France for the French", so make of that what you will... i don't know many intellectuals and business people personally who vote FN - the people i know personally in such positions tend to be left-wing academics, or UMP-voting business people... here, where i live, the vocal FN voters are blatantly racist, anti-immigration, anti-Europe, anti-Muslim and apparently not afraid to say so... i have one educated apparently intelligent acquaintance, French national but of Asian origin, who openly admits to voting FN because of immigration which i find mind-blowing...

[mama cass]

f'king hell, Hezbollah? what is going on... too much agreement, it's hard to handle!

Islamic extremists following a ‘takfiri’ ideology are more offensive to the Prophet Mohammed than Western satirical cartoons, chief of the Lebanese military faction Hezbollah, Hasan Nasrallah, said following the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack.

“The behavior of the takfiri groups that claim to follow Islam have distorted Islam, the Koran and the Muslim nation more than Islam’s enemies … who insulted the prophet in films… or drew cartoons of the prophet,” the Hezbollah leader said in a televised speech to mark the birthday of the Prophet Mohammed, according to Lebanon’s Daily Star.

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by Vincent Vega

Ok, don't know about you, but I start feeling uncomfortable if I have to call a quarter of the society I live in stupid, intolerant or ignorant.

I would say 25% is an extremely low estimate of the "stupid, intolerant, or ignorant" proportion of human society.