Paris, anyone?

[Cornet IV]

So, freedom of speech French style, is a load of tripe IMO. And Obama says he wants to call an international forum to discuss "radicalization". How can he use this word when he and others disclaim any connection between the religion of Islam and terrorism? Using the language of the 'myth' is a give-away and just about as hypocritical as it's possible to be.

I'm afraid, Krystal, that loads of tripe are not restricted to freedom of speech French style. Freedom of speech, in an absolute sense, has perhaps never existed but this freedom as you and I might imagine it has not existed for a very long time indeed. And in my judgment nothing of any consequence will change until we rid ourselves of the inertia created by spineless politicians in thrall to political correctness.

I find it most odd that as an entirely understandable reaction to the Charlie Hebdo atrocity, the French populace has mobilised itself en masse but as far as I am aware, there was hardly a measurable response to the Islamic numerically greater massacres in East Africa or all the other acts of medieval barbarism perpetrated by these dreadful people. The death of poor Theo van Gogh seems barely remembered. Yet the Parisenne event has mushroomed to become a stage upon which the world's political elite can strut to the advancement of their personal aggrandisement. I think Dave's platitudinous cant is sickening - can this be the same Dave who so recently has been seeking to emasculate free speech in our own country? Surely not!

[Flosshilde]

Charlie Hebdo was engaging in racism by portraying the Prophet the way they did; that religion is exclusive to certain races.

Not true; there are European (and other) converts; the actual number would be difficult if not impossible to calculate, and a very small part of the total number of Muslims, but it is still significant.

[Richard Barrett]

Not true; there are European (and other) converts; the actual number would be difficult if not impossible to calculate, and a very small part of the total number of Muslims, but it is still significant.

All religions are "exclusive to certain races" if one wants to put it like that!

[Ian]

Apart from the fact that Islam is NOT exclusive to "certain races"

Partly because this is so obviously true I think the writer is trying to say that Charlie Hebdo is racist because they always depict Muslims as if they were a racial stereotype. (you have to reimagine the punctuation to see this!)

[Krystal]

I'm afraid, Krystal, that loads of tripe are not restricted to freedom of speech French style. Freedom of speech, in an absolute sense, has perhaps never existed but this freedom as you and I might imagine it has not existed for a very long time indeed. And in my judgment nothing of any consequence will change until we rid ourselves of the inertia created by spineless politicians in thrall to political correctness.

I find it most odd that as an entirely understandable reaction to the Charlie Hebdo atrocity, the French populace has mobilised itself en masse but as far as I am aware, there was hardly a measurable response to the Islamic numerically greater massacres in East Africa or all the other acts of medieval barbarism perpetrated by these dreadful people. The death of poor Theo van Gogh seems barely remembered. Yet the Parisenne event has mushroomed to become a stage upon which the world's political elite can strut to the advancement of their personal aggrandisement. I think Dave's platitudinous cant is sickening - can this be the same Dave who so recently has been seeking to emasculate free speech in our own country? Surely not!

I absolutely agree with this - you're right on the money. And for others to suggest that caricaturing the Prophet Mahommed isn't racist because "many races are Muslim" conveniently overlooks the cartoon itself; a dark, unshaven person of Middle Eastern appearance. Not to mention the Islamist fatwa waged against the magazine.

Of course, freedom of speech isn't absolute; I wouldn't tell anything a friend had told me in confidence and I wouldn't tell another friend her dress looked horrible. But to grandstand about "freedom of speech" by holding up a pencil is precisely that. I think the whole debate is much more nuanced than symbolism and, simultaneously, trying to shut down divergent opinion. It's the oldest trick in the book. And it won't stand while-ever there are intelligent people willing to speak for their own rights.

The good old Left believes in consensus, clearly: that means we should ALL agree with them!!

It's a good discussion to have and we do need to have it, no holds barred.

[jayne lee wilson]

"Entirely understandable..."
"The world's political elite..."
"The good old left..."

All this condescension...
The political elite no longer matter...
Who are "The good old left"...? Apart from an easily evoked paper tiger...

A image of the Prophet Mohammed will shortly appear, in a 1-million print run of Charlie Hebdo, and he will bear the slogan:
Je Suis Charlie

and above it,
Tout est Pardonne


It will sell out fast.
Muslims, Atheists, Humanists, Christians, Jews, all will buy it.
Not everyone will like it. Of course.

Simplicity within complexity, complexity within simplicity, Muslims, Atheists, Humanists, Christians, Jews, arm-in-arm in Paris on Sunday. Tears and - laughter...
No tanks, No guns, No troops to the Middle East...
No More...revenge. Please...
This is NOT a war.


10,000 Police on French streets today is... a victory for terrorists.
And we want it to stop. So we say and say again, like dear George Clooney tonight,

Je Suis Charlie

So Publish the cartoons, keep laughing at the pompous power (narrow, distorted, vicious so-called "Islamism") that turned young, disenfranchised Parisian men into killing machines, that took us to war in Iraq and Afghanistan (with young Anglo-American killing machines), laugh at the dumb hate-speech of Farage, Le Pen and the rest...
LAUGH at it and keep laughing, march peacefully against it, never be persuaded to spread the hatred further...

It might help, a bit...
Gotta better suggestion?

[Krystal]

Such simplistic nonsense and political psycho-babble!! The tired old nostrums of the Left - that we can engineer society with political correctness (inter alia) - won't cut it with a great many people now in Europe. You can call them haters or extremists if you want - (I'm waiting to hear them yell God is Great!), but the more frightening reality is that they're everyday people who predicted just exactly what would happen a few days ago and who predict there's going to be more to come.

Yeah, I've got a better suggestion. How about STARTING with some serious legal sanctions for habitual offenders; appropriate punishments/jail time? Put to rest finally the old canard that you can 'rehabilitate' all people with a bit of counselling and a slap over the wrist with a feather. Expect all in your citizens - private and corporate - to comply with the laws of the land; if not, some SERIOUS and meaningful punishments. Not the revolving door of justice and the kind of leniency which saw these barbaric criminal extremists murder the good people of Paris. I submit that the common denominator here is career criminals who've got off way too lightly in 'the system'. Why were these low life on the streets? Because some do-gooders think we all should feel sorry for them - bla bla bla, ad infinitim, ad nauseum - and 'give them another chance'. Time for somebody to draw the dots....wait! Some have already, but we must demonize them because we don't want to hear what they have to say.

And the Left's continued insistence on victimhood does not one bit of good for the society at large. March peacefully while some maniac straps a bomb into 10 year olds. Get a grip. Let the adults take charge. Don't avert your gaze to African countries - keep your eyes on your home countries because that is where you'll feel the effects of inviting people to live with you who harbour savage grievances and who hate one another. Change is possible - you need the will to do it. Wishing it and holding hands won't make it so. That's what Pollyanna did; she wanted to be 'glad' about everything.

I wonder why Merkel said - within the last 12 months - that "multiculturalism has failed"?

How about doing some wid-ER reading:

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2015/01/wittenberg-mosque-doors/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/01/12/ayaan-hirsi-ali-responds-to-paris-attack-n1940778

It might interest you to know that Brandeis University withdrew an Honorary Doctorate to be awarded to Ayaan Hirsi Ali because of the things she's written about Muslims; this woman was born a Muslim in Somalia. Appalling ideologies from the so-called 'progressives' gives rise to censorship via political correctness.

[hedgehog]

Krystal, your words terrify me.

[mercia]

I just can't see the point of deliberately goading a group of people whom one knows to be murderously violent. The image that comes to my mind is of a little boy repeatedly poking a snake with a stick, the snake gets more and more angry, then everybody is shocked when the snake finally sinks its fangs into the boy's leg.

[P. G. Tipps]

Only if you twist his meaning out of all recognition ....

On the contrary, S_A has since confirmed the only meaning anyone could possibly interpret from his post. He insists that 'we bring it on ourselves' if we are insulted because of our beliefs. Indeed he thinks that all this is 'quite obvious'. I suppose, adopting similar logic, a lone woman walking home in the dark at night which might provoke a sex assault would be 'quite obvious' as well?

I assume that this somewhat muddled approach to freedom of speech and action (within the law) applies to the sincerely-held beliefs of Marxists/Atheists as well as Moslems, Jews, Christians, etc ... or are they a special case?

[ahinton]

"Entirely understandable..."
"The world's political elite..."
"The good old left..."

All this condescension...
The political elite no longer matter...
Who are "The good old left"...? Apart from an easily evoked paper tiger...

A image of the Prophet Mohammed will shortly appear, in a 1-million print run of Charlie Hebdo, and he will bear the slogan:
Je Suis Charlie

and above it,
Tout est Pardonne


It will sell out fast.
Muslims, Atheists, Humanists, Christians, Jews, all will buy it.
Not everyone will like it. Of course.

Simplicity within complexity, complexity within simplicity, Muslims, Atheists, Humanists, Christians, Jews, arm-in-arm in Paris on Sunday. Tears and - laughter...
No tanks, No guns, No troops to the Middle East...
No More...revenge. Please...
This is NOT a war.


10,000 Police on French streets today is... a victory for terrorists.
And we want it to stop. So we say and say again, like dear George Clooney tonight,

Je Suis Charlie

So Publish the cartoons, keep laughing at the pompous power (narrow, distorted, vicious so-called "Islamism") that turned young, disenfranchised Parisian men into killing machines, that took us to war in Iraq and Afghanistan (with young Anglo-American killing machines), laugh at the dumb hate-speech of Farage, Le Pen and the rest...
LAUGH at it and keep laughing, march peacefully against it, never be persuaded to spread the hatred further...

It might help, a bit...
Gotta better suggestion?

I don't see what harm can be done by adopting such a suggestion in principle although, when such acts do nevertheless exceptionally occur (and even now they are indeed mercifully exceptional), they must, as you imply, be treated as criminal ones, not as military ones for, as you write, this is NOT a war. The George W Bush "war on terrrr" stuff of yesteryear should be treated as being of yesteryear as it did a great deal of damage by spreading misinformation and misleading sentiments throughout much of the West and was made manifest in the Western incursions into other nations without war officially having first been declared on or by any of them. The noton of "holy war" is just as damaging.

I would, however, question that the presence of 10,000 police on the French streets represents "a victory for terrorists", altnhough it might be one for petty criminals who react to it with some glee, thinking that they'll all be far too busy and otherwise preoccupied to notice them seizing opportunities to commit petty crimes. It certainly sounds to be a knee-jerk response to the killing of fewer than 0.002% of that number of people and it cannot be maintained daily 24/7 indefinitely. It looks to be designed to convey the assuring impression of strength and determination as well as solidarity with French citizens who "want it to stop", but the criminals in waiting will do just that - wait, until such a security measure has tailed off and life gets back to "normal". Yes, if sufficient people determine to laugh all of it off at every opportunity and none, it will likely achieve some positive results; the trouble is that it takes only one dissenting criminal or a small handful thereof to wreak yet more havoc while everyone else is laughing.

"Publish the cartoons"? I'm not so sure. A point has already been made that I'm less than certain bears constant repetition as it is designed to provoke the very kinds of people who are already intent on such criminal activity and encourage them to carry out more of it; I don't see that as a laughing matter. I wonder if the French are, in general terms, more or less tolerant of such publications than the Brits and whether they respond with the same kind of sense of humour. Imagine a UK journal with a modest circulation publishing a cartoon of Jesus Christ in his birthday suit participating in group sex with some of his disciples. Would it break the law in UK? Probably not. Would it provoke aggrieved (though not necessarily criminal) reactions from sufficient memebrs of the public for it to matter? Quite possibly. Would it be seen by many as funny? Almot certainly not. Would Private Eye publish it as an item of satire? Almost certainly not. While obviously sympathising unreservedly with the victims of the Paris atrocities and with their nearest and dearest, I really do believe that journals such as Charlie Hebdo are capable of making make their points about free speech, secularity and the rest without necessarily perceiving the need to descend into the kind of provocative tasteless stupidity that risks inciting violence as is now known to have been the case. Yes, cartoons lampooning the high and mighty in UK a quarter of a millenium ago were indeed pretty hard-hitting and would likely not be accepted and appreciated today quite as they might have been at the time, but then they didn't fly around the world instantly then because there was no internet, social media and the like in the 18th century.

[ahinton]

Such simplistic nonsense and political psycho-babble!!

Whose? Which?

The tired old nostrums of the Left - that we can engineer society with political correctness (inter alia) - won't cut it with a great many people now in Europe. You can call them haters or extremists if you want - (I'm waiting to hear them yell God is Great!), but the more frightening reality is that they're everyday people who predicted just exactly what would happen a few days ago and who predict there's going to be more to come.

Leaving aside who this "left" may be (and, whoever they are, they don't seem to be the lawmakers in most Western European states), these perpetrators are only "everyday people" to the extent that they are as able to resist the kind of manipulation by such organisations as ISIS (which I suspect even you might agree do not largely comprise "everyday people") that risks resulting in vengeful killings of the kind recently witnessed.

Yeah, I've got a better suggestion. How about STARTING with some serious legal sanctions for habitual offenders; appropriate punishments/jail time? Put to rest finally the old canard that you can 'rehabilitate' all people with a bit of counselling and a slap over the wrist with a feather. Expect all in your citizens - private and corporate - to comply with the laws of the land; if not, some SERIOUS and meaningful punishments. Not the revolving door of justice and the kind of leniency which saw these barbaric criminal extremists murder the good people of Paris. I submit that the common denominator here is career criminals who've got off way too lightly in 'the system'. Why were these low life on the streets? Because some do-gooders think we all should feel sorry for them - bla bla bla, ad infinitim, ad nauseum - and 'give them another chance'. Time for somebody to draw the dots....wait! Some have already, but we must demonize them because we don't want to hear what they have to say.

Utter nonsense! You appear to write as though the law and its implementation allows murders to go unpunished or only very lightly punished; those in Paris last week only went "unpunished" (in the sense of the arrest, interrogation, charging, trying, convicting and imprisoning the perpetrators) because the perpetrators' lives were ended by the police doing to them what they'd done to their victims. Call that tit-fot-tat if you (or someone) will, but that was hardly a rehabilitative response nor one illustrative of the so-called "revolving door of justice" of which you write.

And the Left's continued insistence on victimhood does not one bit of good for the society at large. March peacefully while some maniac straps a bomb into 10 year olds. Get a grip. Let the adults take charge. Don't avert your gaze to African countries - keep your eyes on your home countries because that is where you'll feel the effects of inviting people to live with you who harbour savage grievances and who hate one another. Change is possible - you need the will to do it. Wishing it and holding hands won't make it so. That's what Pollyanna did; she wanted to be 'glad' about everything.

Nonsense again! I won't repeat the questions "who are the Left" or "how do they wield power and influence", but are you seriously trying to persuade members here that only members of it "insist continuously on victimhood" (whatever that means)? In other words, do you believe that only "the Left" consider anyone to be "victims" in all of this? Let which adults take charge? It's up to the government to make laws about crime and up to the police to police them and the judiciary to deal with perpetrators; those are the adults already in charge, with all their faults. What are those who "march peacefully" supposed to do instead. How are they all supposed to be able in all cases to identify at 100 paces "people who harbour savage grievances who hate one another" until such savage grievances and hatred actually manifests itself in criminal action, by which time it's too late? That said, it remains important for Westen citizens - including those marching peacefully - to recognise that some of their governments' actions have contrived to foster and exacerbate some of those grievances and that hatred before they allow themselves to become susceptible to the kind of complacency that persuades them that it's all the fault of "someone else".

I wonder why Merkel said - within the last 12 months - that "multiculturalism has failed"?

Then you'd better go and ask her; I'm sure that she'd be delighted to submit to your questioning.

[Don Petter]

I just can't see the point of deliberately goading a group of people whom one knows to be murderously violent. The image that comes to my mind is of a little boy repeatedly poking a snake with a stick, the snake gets more and more angry, then everybody is shocked when the snake finally sinks its fangs into the boy's leg.

See my #47 !

[mercia]

See my #47 !

ah yes, more succinctly put

[MrGongGong]

You might have seen this with the comment about how easy it is to create an illusion.