Paris, anyone?

[P. G. Tipps]

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 can think of one or two but it would be most unwise to post these here ...

And there lies the crux. The normally 'sensitive' ones have now become very insensitive towards those whom they used to defend to the hilt in their 'anti-imperialism' crusades.

Those who march with banners saying 'Je Suis Charlie' are clearly identifying themselves with those whose business is to insult 'people of faith' and others. The apparent naivety of many displaying and uttering this slogan is quite breathtaking, considering the offence caused to many, not least the overwhelmingly peaceful majority of Moslems in the West. There is a clear case for restraint on all sides here and for society to concentrate on defeating terrorism, but, no, we still have people marching with their silly banners and slogans!

Furthermore, when 'Hollywood darlings' like George Clooney start encouraging us to jump on populist knee-jerk bandwagons at a quite unconnected awards ceremony, some might instinctively suspect that is the very time to remain standing on somewhat more solid ground ...

[ahinton]

Those who march with banners saying 'Je Suis Charlie' are clearly identifying themselves with those whose business is to insult 'people of faith' and others.

On what grounds do you assert that? Were this true, Charlie Hebdo would presumably have done nothing in its history other than deliberately and wilfully insult Islam and its adherents by making scurrilous fun of them; is that the case? Has that publication made fun of other faiths, or agnisticism, or atheism?

The apparent naivety of many displaying and uttering this slogan is quite breathtaking, considering the offence caused to many, not least the overwhelmingly peaceful majority of Moslems in the West. There is a clear case for restraint on all sides here and for society to concentrate on defeating terrorism, but, no, we still have people marching with their silly banners and slogans!

If people do not do this kind of thing, ever, how can anyone else, including governments, have any idea wht they think? Yes, Charlie Hebdo has, I believe, committed acts of sheer stupidity but the responses to these have been as disproportionate as they have been criminal; such a journal can put its points about freedom of speech and the rest in other no less powerful ways although, at the same time, it cannot be held wholly and directly responsible for the fact tht not everyone shares the same sense of humour any more than they share the same religion or none.

Furthermore, when 'Hollywood darlings' like George Clooney start encouraging us to jump on populist knee-jerk bandwagons at a quite unconnected awards ceremony, some might instinctively suspect that is the very time to remain standing on somewhat more solid ground ...

What "solid ground" is that, then? Mr Clooney did not, after all, invent this particular so-called "populist knee-jerk bandwagon", so oughtn't you to be focusing your attention on those who did, to which Mr Clooney merely referred?

[Nick Armstrong]

Blimey! I had to pinch myself - thought it was a painting too!

What an amazing photo

This is the bloke who took it, on his mobile phone: https://www.facebook.com/martin.argyroglo

[MrGongGong]

There is a clear case for restraint on all sides here and for society to concentrate on defeating terrorism, but, no, we still have people marching with their silly banners and slogans!
.

(For those unfamiliar with the happenings in the now defunct basement)

One has to remember that Mr Tipps thinks that ALL protests and marches are "silly" and infantile.

[Richard Barrett]

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

Indeed. For over a million ordinary French people it was a demonstration in favour of freedom of speech and against the indiscriminate killings; for the political classes it was a photo opportunity, as usual in their own isolated bubble surrounded by photographers and bodyguards. Are they with us or not? This photo makes the answer quite clear.

[MrGongGong]

Indeed. For over a million ordinary French people it was a demonstration in favour of freedom of speech and against the indiscriminate killings; for the political classes it was a photo opportunity, as usual in their own isolated bubble surrounded by photographers and bodyguards. Are they with us or not? This photo makes the answer quite clear.

Absolutely
As many people have pointed out, here are some of the people who have nurtured and encouraged division when the vast majority of people simply want to get on with their lives.

"A big boy did it and ran away"?

[Beef Oven!]

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.

I don't think this analogy helps us to understand this particular situation. Charlie Hedbo has satirised Rabbis, Priests, Imams, the church etc, but not all of these have had people within their ranks responding, like your snake sinking its fangs into legs. I think the analogy misses the point. As does post #47.

[Anna]

Angela Merkel is set to join a Muslim community rally in Berlin to promote tolerance, condemn the attacks in Paris and send a rebuke to Germany’s growing anti-Islamic movement.

The vigil is to start on Tuesday afternoon at Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate and is organised by the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, under the banner “Let’s be there for each other. Terror: not in our name!”

Merkel, who is to be joined by most of her cabinet at the event, has spoken out against the far-right Pegida group and stressed on Monday that “Islam belongs to Germany”. Pegida drew a record 25,000 marchers to its 12th weekly rally in Dresden on Monday.

The rise of the far Right is, in my opinion, beneficial to terrorists as it sows discord - which of course is what they want. The more anti-immigrant feeling there is the better for them in recruiting people to their cause.

[Don Petter]

I don't think this analogy helps us to understand this particular situation. Charlie Hedbo has satirised Rabbis, Priests, Imams, the church etc, but not all of these have had people within their ranks responding, like your snake sinking its fangs into legs. I think the analogy misses the point. As does post #47.

That was the point of #47.

Even if you satirise every one in sight equally, it is no preventative. Eventually one of them will bite.

[mercia]

I think the analogy misses the point.

fair enough, I just hope that if Charlie continues in the same vein it doesn't provoke more murders, though logically I can't see why it might not. I'm just trying to urge a little caution. There are lots more madmen (without a sense of humour) out there.

[P. G. Tipps]

(For those unfamiliar with the happenings in the now defunct basement)

One has to remember that Mr Tipps thinks that ALL protests and marches are "silly" and infantile.

I'll not in any way apologise for solid consistency and clear even-handedness, Mr GG!

Most 'protest' marches today are 'silly' and infantile, imv, thoroughly futile at best and downright provocative to others at worst.

Still, just another cross the silent majority living in free societies have to bear, I suppose ...

[ahinton]

Most 'protest' marches today are 'silly' and infantile, imv, thoroughly futile at best and downright provocative to others at worst.

Still, just another cross the silent majority living in free societies have to bear, I suppose ...

And your alternative solution is what? Telling people that they shouldn't do it or going farther and making such demonstrations illegal? Either (though more especially the latter) would involve compromising the right to free speech.

[MrGongGong]

Still, just another cross the silent majority living in free societies have to bear, I suppose ...

Is that an entry for the "most clichés in a sentence" competition?

[P. G. Tipps]

And your alternative solution is what? Telling people that they shouldn't do it or going farther and making such demonstrations illegal? Either (though more especially the latter) would involve compromising the right to free speech.

Well, I've already quite often and clearly stated that, sadly, the abuse of free speech and deliberate insult are the price we pay for a free society. So I'm uncomfortable with the idea of censorship in a supposedly free society, though no doubt valid arguments could be raised for it in regard to encouraging paedophilia, for example.

That does not mean that one must be seen waving banners in support of those who abuse free speech by quite deliberately insulting and goading others. I don't believe in deliberately offending anyone whether they be Moslem, Jew, Black, Brown, Yellow, Homosexual, Feminist, Socialist, Capitalist, etc etc however much our colours of skin and views may differ. Why would any reasonable person wish to do that?

I hope that's now crystal clear.

[kea]

Puzzler #1: I had never heard of Charlie Hebdo before the shootings, nor of any of its cartoons. Now it's been catapulted to worldwide fame and reached a significantly wider audience than it would have on merit alone. Terrorist own goal, points to the far right and anti-Muslim lobbies? Even if most of the people claiming to be Charlie have never read it, as I suspect, these cartoons are going to spread—and already there's been a disproportionate amount of focus on the ones that target Muslims and Islam. Can't see that being good for reasoned debate.

Puzzler #2: As often seems to happen the conservative rhetoric focuses a lot on how the West is 'weak' and 'soft' and 'coddling' and lots of other coded or overt gendered language. A strong, masculine approach is what's needed to defend the European way of life against Islam, not to mention traditional family values so we can outbreed the immigrants. And as often seems to happen I'm led to wonder what it is these people actually have against radical Islam in the first place. It seems like if you're after a culture that actually does follow traditional family values and respond to problems in a strong and uncompromising way radical Islam would be exactly what you're looking for. (Let's face it, if our 4 terrorists had been white and the people they killed had been those who had done something undesirable in our culture, like sex traffickers, they would be the heroes of an action movie. Have guns and know how to use them; toss out pithy one-liners as they make their getaway; martyr themselves in a blaze of glory.)