|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Terrorist attack on french satirical magazine. Why
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I think there’s a whole other side to this that is very much ignored, and that is the unholy great mess that was (in this case French) colonialism.
The two suspects in this case are both of Algerian descent, as was Mohamed Merah, the lone wolf who attacked a Jewish school and French soldiers in the South a while back, killing seven people. On the whole, and generalising wildly, Algerians are rather less well integrated in French society than their Moroccan and Tunisian counterparts.
The French venture in Algeria ended in the 1960s with a very bloody colonial war that resulted in the collapse of the Fourth Republic, and I think in many ways we are still experiencing the fallout. There is still a massive taboo surrounding said bloody colonial war, and French society isn't ready to talk about it yet. Which explains why it’s so much easier to blame Islam.
Citing the fact that there are so many Muslims in France seems very contradictory to me. First up, and coming back to colonialism, the peoples of North Africa never asked us to invade their countries back in the day. Furthermore, the fact that 10% of the French population comes from a Muslim background means that they aren’t some mysterious Other to many of us. They are our colleagues and neighbours. Less so in small towns in the provinces, but in large cities like Paris, where this attack was carried out, we all know any number of (more or less devout) Muslim people and most of them are perfectly nice, law-abiding citizens. Yes, some of the scarier suburbs have high North African populations, but like I said earlier, I believe that the social problems there have a lot less to do with Islam than they do with the problem of unemployed, disaffected young men.
Your points about French colonialism are very apt, but I think it goes a bit further. After the Islamists (FIS) were elected to government in Algeria in the 90s, the army cancelled the elections; this led to a bloody civil war. I think the French govt helped the Algerian govt to suppress the Islamists. Later, of course, France has intervened in Mali, against various Islamist groups.
I don't really know how all of this has impacted on the French Muslims of N. African descent; but I would guess that it has not slowed down radicalization.
But there seem to be confusing reports about the Charlie killers, some journos saying that they are AQ members, others that they are of Algerian descent, although they could be both.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Of course I'm aware that there are other "causes" in the world. I lived in London throughout Northern Ireland's "troubles" which spilled over several times into my city! I'm just saying that in the years since 9/11, you can be almost certain that any terrorist attack on a Western city will have an Islamic motive in there somewhere. Any religion, philosophy or ideology which lends itself to that kind of behaviour has something seriously wrong at its very heart, and it needs to be changed from within. All we can do from without is stay vigilent.
We perhaps need to define terrorism. People in the middle east would probably define drone attacks as terrorism. Palestinians would define Israeli bombing runs and demolishing homes as terrorism. While we would define rocket attacks or suicide bombings as such. Word do make a difference in perception: if we call terrorism "asymmetric war" it seems to make a difference. I think there's an asymmetric war underway. We drone bomb them, they shoot us or bomb us. Neither us nor them needing their own people to do it any more. We do it with impersonal flying contraptions, them with impersonal involvement of people they don't even know.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Society is becoming far, far too easily offended by satire and humourous mocking. It is essential that we are able to mock leaders, be they political, religious or otherwise.
Along the other route lies dictatorship.
Totally agree with this. We must assert the freedom to deride and mock without being bound by cultural taboos from elsewhere.
I'd like to see the risk spread around by publishers. Those publications with a taste for sensationalism should republish cartoons of Muhammad from Charlie Ebdo. Other publications could publish historical and more respectful depictions of Muhammad drawn by Muslims. The taboo on images of the so-called prophet have not always been universal or absolute.
Not going to happen. If Stephen Pollard, who is neither unsound on freedom of the press nor soft on Islamism, thinks that it would be putting his staff at risk unnecessarily, then I think that the same calculation is going to be made across the Street of Shame. Given that the Jihadi brand is particularly strong among the "homicidal loony with a grudge" demographic no-one really wants to be the person who made the decision that got some poor innocent, (probably a temp or a junior clerical sort given the way these things pan out), hacked to pieces by the latest recruit to Al-Mentalist. There is also the question as to whether or not this would constitute a kind of collective punishment - printing something that a large number of basically decent people would find offensive to stick two fingers up at a couple of murderers from the same religion. Also there is the question of how the advertisers would react. Also quite a lot of newsagents are of Pakistani heritage and might not be too keen on stocking newspapers which insult Big Mo (See also sales of the Sun on Merseyside after Hillsborough). Oh, and it would probably do nothing much for community relations and all that jazz. The British press are feral and horrible on all sorts of levels but not quite daft enough to act as recruiting sergeants for Al Quaeda.
To anyone who wants to say "isn't this special treatment for Muslims?" is welcome to discuss the matter when they have ambled down the Falls Road or turned up in the Celtic home end wearing their "Fuck the Pope" T-Shirt.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
Is there any reason why we should treat these murderers differently from, let's say, someone that murders an abortion doctor?
A lot of people in the US are strongly opposed to abortion. Most of those people are also strongly opposed to going around killing people who perform abortions. I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that the proper response to the killing of an abortion doctor would be to start performing abortions in the town square for the amusement and edification of passers-by, but the response from pro-choice folks to the murder of an abortionist was largely an increased determination to see that women who wanted abortions could access them safely.
I don't recall any suggestions that Planned Parenthood, for example, should close down its operations in conservative states because it was too dangerous for its employees.
What should we do? Just carry on. Find and jail the murderers. Say again and again that yes, we understand that many of the cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo were particularly offensive to Muslims, that we understand that Islam has particular issues about depictions of Mohammed, and that nevertheless, it is and should remain legal to be offensive. I don't see any particular need for the wider press to gratuitously offend Muslims by republishing Mohammed cartoons, but I know some people will do it, and I expect the wider Muslim community to understand and put up with it.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I just came across this very interesting and thought-provoking commentary on the nature of satire, and an argument that not all cartoons are created equal.
Yes, this is where the source of some of my unease comes from.
Firstly, murderous people are murderous people and should be condemned as such. Equally free speech has to be free.
At the same time, there are some types of free speech which are nevertheless free - but which people oppose on the grounds of taste (like who a comedian making jokes about rape)
At this moment various people are calling the offending cartoons to be republished everywhere often as a form of 'setting context'. But ISTM that such a context would also include an examination of some of the other cartoons published by the same magazine, including things like this (which would then lead on to some of the issues le vie en rouge touches upon):
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6ypEObCIAEx5Gv.jpg
(Warning that some will consider that offensive)
At the same time the internet is alive with various depictions of mohammed that muslims would find offensive. I fail to find much difference between those and something like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Judensau_Blockbuch.jpg
(Again a similar warning)
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
As that what Jesus says Matt?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
As a great Englishman once wrote :
"Maybe they weren't loved when they were young--
Maybe they should be hung by their tongues"
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Several attempts have been made on this thread to see this atrocity in the light of the Israeli/Palestinian problem, or the involvement of the US and its allies in the affairs of the Middle East. I don't find that an acceptable reason. The freedom of speech and freedom of the press which most of us support, allows publications to criticise, lambast and satirise our political elite and even our religious beliefs. While some people may find that offensive, it's part of a democratic system which allws us to question. I think most of us support that.
Where the Catholic Church, The Dalai Lame, the Jews and numerous politicians have been mercilessly lashed by this magazine, it's only the extremists of Islam who think they have the right to punish and murder where no laws have been broken. Whatever may be happening elsewhere in the world, the people of Paris have the right to exercise their freedoms within the laws they have voted for. Islam is a dangerous alien culture and should be recognised for what it is.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Islam is a dangerous alien culture and should be recognised for what it is.
I asked this of l'Organist in Hell, and I'll ask it of you.
Say you're right. Say we all do that. What happens next?
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Well, if enough French voters come to agree with PaulTH or even with irish_lord99, then a Marine Le Pen presidency happens next.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Islam is a dangerous alien culture and should be recognised for what it is.
Not just alien to the UK (like Christianity), or to Europe (like Christianity), but alien full stop, without qualification? Does it come from outer space?
[ 08. January 2015, 19:10: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
It's a bit of a farce that the pillars of free speech and western democracy are upheld by defending the right of a vicious satirical magazine to trash whomsoever it wishes with impunity as long as it stays within the letter of the law. The cartoons linked to look like from cover from Viz (at least Viz refers to largely fictional characters).
I sincerely wish this had never happened and I also sincerely wish for an end to violence everywhere. But I have to also note that when compared to collateral damage from drone strikes in the name of the freedom to publish such material, it's still a minor incident. And I wonder how much we will eventually have to pay in the West for past misdemeanours in our middle east policies. If the only substantial reaction is an anti-moslem knee-jerk, it's a very slippery slope.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
O God, the self-loathing victim-blaming. It burns, it burns.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
PaulTH wrote:
Islam is a dangerous alien culture and should be recognised for what it is.
I feel ashamed to be taking part in a forum where something so vile could be written; and a weird kind of shame that I had to read it. However, I guess that God may forgive such inhuman and inhumane sentiments.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
O God, the self-loathing victim-blaming. It burns, it burns.
Victims - yes - blaming - no - unless you want a hot meal of soundbites and platitudes. It's up to everyone to end this, and unpalatable shares of responsibility have to be assimilated along with all the easier stuff. If nobody had been killed, would you defend this publication tooth and nail? If the only wish is for the Law (French or International, take your pick) to be fulfilled, then nothing changes.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
If freedom of speech doesn't include the freedom to say things that are offensive, it's virtually meaningless. People are constantly saying ugly and stupid things about Christianity, but to suggest that they ought to be murdered for it, or even put in jail for it, would be grotesque.
Rational human beings do not commit murder in response to being offended. I am not in favor of making Muslims a protected class around whom we all must tiptoe so that we don't set off the powder keg. I am not in favor of curtailing liberties in order to protect the sensibilities of people who do not value liberty. We may as well just give them the whip hand and have done with it.
I am aware that the action at Charlie Hebdo had antecedents. The French government has a lot to answer for, as do nearly all Western governments. The first world's meddling in the affairs of Middle Eastern governments has helped to create the climate in which this attack took place, without question--and that meddling has to stop immediately.
But at the end of the day, it is the murderers, and they alone, who bear responsibility for their actions--whatever the traumas in their childhoods, whatever the injustices suffered by their forbears at the hands of the French. The forces of history didn't pick up AK-47s to shoot unarmed cartoonists and journalists. Human beings did. And human beings are accountable for their actions.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
PaulTH:
Islam is not a culture, it is a creed. There are moslems of many cultures, just as there are many different strands of Islam.
To imply that Islam on its own is a culture is to fall into the trap of thinking that to dislike certain traits of certain moslems is racist - it isn't because islam (or being moslem) isn't a race or ethnicity, its a belief same as Christianity or Hinduism.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
If nobody had been killed, would you defend this publication tooth and nail?
Yes, of course. Wouldn't you?
Back to Orfeo.
Of course, there's a complex interplay of factors behind terrorism. But does it need saying that government propaganda and even pulpit preaching played a part in the Rwandan genocide? It is also clear that Christian tropes about Christ killers played their part in anti-semitism and dare I say it that National Socialist ideology might have encouraged the odd concentration camp commander to enthusiastically gas Jews. As to the part that Islamic notions of martyrdom play in suicide bombings I'll leave to your imagination.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
If freedom of speech doesn't include the freedom to say things that are offensive, it's virtually meaningless. People are constantly saying ugly and stupid things about Christianity, but to suggest that they ought to be murdered for it, or even put in jail for it, would be grotesque.
Rational human beings do not commit murder in response to being offended. I am not in favor of making Muslims a protected class around whom we all must tiptoe so that we don't set off the powder keg. I am not in favor of curtailing liberties in order to protect the sensibilities of people who do not value liberty. We may as well just give them the whip hand and have done with it.
I am aware that the action at Charlie Hebdo had antecedents. The French government has a lot to answer for, as do nearly all Western governments. The first world's meddling in the affairs of Middle Eastern governments has helped to create the climate in which this attack took place, without question--and that meddling has to stop immediately.
But at the end of the day, it is the murderers, and they alone, who bear responsibility for their actions--whatever the traumas in their childhoods, whatever the injustices suffered by their forbears at the hands of the French. The forces of history didn't pick up AK-47s to shoot unarmed cartoonists and journalists. Human beings did. And human beings are accountable for their actions.
I would agree with all of that if it were a random act of violence. In fact, I still agree with all of it, BUT it also comes in a historical and political package. Treating it as more or less a one-off is what the Law has to do when it is passing judgement - yes - the Law is there for when individuals lose their ability to treat other humans within commonly agreed and enforceable bounds. As I said, if you want more than that, it needs a wider viewpoint.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
If nobody had been killed, would you defend this publication tooth and nail?
Yes, of course. Wouldn't you?
I wouldn't give them (as a publication and business) the time of day. I don't believe that the right to Free Speech automatically confers the right to use it vindictively. Just as having a religious doctrine doesn't (ever) automatically confer the right to kill on its behalf.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
I wouldn't give them (as a publication and business) the time of day. I don't believe that the right to Free Speech automatically confers the right to use it vindictively. Just as having a religious doctrine doesn't (ever) automatically confer the right to kill on its behalf.
Those two things can't be equated. It's your perfect right to choose not to support the magazine, of course--and I doubt whether I'd want to pick it up myself. But mockery, however nasty, simply isn't in the same moral category as murder.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
I wouldn't give them (as a publication and business) the time of day. I don't believe that the right to Free Speech automatically confers the right to use it vindictively. Just as having a religious doctrine doesn't (ever) automatically confer the right to kill on its behalf.
Those two things can't be equated. It's your perfect right to choose not to support the magazine, of course--and I doubt whether I'd want to pick it up myself. But mockery, however nasty, simply isn't in the same moral category as murder.
So we support something on principle because it isn't as bad as murder? How about GBH? Extortion? Minor theft? Trespass? I'm not sure where you draw a line - an ability to recognise that all human beings are deserving of (mutual) respect is the bottom line. Whether our mundane legal system can cope with the distinction adequately or not. After that, it's just a matter of degree. I would rather be mocked than murdered, but I'm not sure how the defence of any form of human unpleasantness gets us anywhere. The sympathy is for the families and the individuals. Lets not get so mushy that we keep the bathwater and put it in the cot with the baby.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
I have spent quite a lot of today musing on #jesuischarlie.
You know, in most meaningful respects I am not Charlie. I find much of what they publish distasteful at best, and downright offensive at worst. They’re a fairly equal opportunity offender, FWIW. In the tradition of the satirical French left, religions of all stripes are a target. But the point of “jesuischarlie” is to say that this is an attack on all of us. When I came home tonight, the Paris Mairie information boards were displaying “Nous sommes tous Charlie” (We are all Charlie) which is a more forceful way of saying the same thing. I find Charlie Hebdo offensive, but in a democratic country under the rule of law people don’t get arbitrarily shot for publishing things that are offensive. People here very much feel that this is a (I keep fishing for the word here – in French it would be “atteinte” – attack? strike? violation?) of our fundamental democratic principles. If something is so offensive as to be illegal then there are channels for that. But no one gets to murder someone because they disagree with them.
This incidentally, is also why I am not nursing murderous revenge fantasies. Assuming the suspects are as guilty as they look, I don’t want them dead or abused. I want them to be arrested, given a fair trial with access to appropriate legal representation and then sent to jail for a very long time. Because that’s what happens in a democracy under the rule of law. Anything else is to descend to their level and help them in their aim of undermining the principles that make this a (albeit imperfectly) free and democratic country.
I think my new hashtag is #jesuischarliemêmesijenesuispasd’accordaveclui (I am Charlie even if I don’t agree with him). It might be a bit long.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
]So we support something on principle because it isn't as bad as murder? How about GBH? Extortion? Minor theft? Trespass? I'm not sure where you draw a line
In most civilized countries, all the things you mention are illegal. Being an asshole is not.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
If freedom of speech doesn't include the freedom to say things that are offensive, it's virtually meaningless. People are constantly saying ugly and stupid things about Christianity, but to suggest that they ought to be murdered for it, or even put in jail for it, would be grotesque.
Well then, no doubt Australia is a grotesque country for punishing Man Haron Monis for sending offensive letters to relatives of Australian victims of terrorism and troops killed in Afghanistan. Or is it okay because he was only sentenced to community service rather than put in jail?
I'm ever so grateful for your opinion, though, that my freedom of speech in this country is virtually meaningless. I hadn't quite realised that I was living in an authoritarian state.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
As to the part that Islamic notions of martyrdom play in suicide bombings I'll leave to your imagination.
You don't have to leave it your imagination. As already referred to, I'm aware of the studies of Robert Pape that show how suicide bombing was invented by non-Muslims and employed by people of all religious backgrounds as a tactic to drive out occupying forces, and completely ignored by Muslims in parts of the world that had no occupying forces to drive out.
But don't let facts and data get in the way of a good myth about religious fanatics and martyrdom.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Several attempts have been made on this thread to see this atrocity in the light of the Israeli/Palestinian problem, or the involvement of the US and its allies in the affairs of the Middle East.
Oh but it is. The West/ colonial powers has made enemies. Take British involvement for example: Egypt, Palestine, Pakistan, adventures in Afghanistan. Lots of other trouble spots on the map that used to be shaded in pink.
Violence begets violence. Our nations have been violent. Our missionaries went out with the musket, and lo and behold, some of the natives can't distinguish between imperialism and the gospel (because it didn't come in a package of peace and goodwill to all men).
And what will the right wing rags do? Say that foreign aid should be cut and immigration draw bridges should be hauled up to keep the 'enemy' out, little realising that these things are a way of redressing centuries of cockups.
Re-education is needed. Starting with what collateral damage done by a 'smart' drone strike really pisses the victims families and friends off. We just don't see what is being done in our name. It is a lot more than 12 people.
The world is a screwed up and unjust place. It must make God angry. How do we work out a theology that isn't just hand wringing or taking over from God in acts of vengeance? I can't sort one out for Islam as I don't believe it. I bet it starts with humility, repentance and forgiveness on our/ my part. I expect it is starts with something about dealing with our own visual impairments before attempting ophthalmology on someone else.
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
This has nothing to do with Islam. The offenders
bring sham on their faith by their actions. Fortunately the faith of 1.2 billion people can not be so easily tarnished .
We need to pray for the victims 12 dead and 11 wounded . And that we don't start an Islamaphobic reaction . Let us love our neighbor of all faiths, or of none. ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Re images and Islam: "Aniconism in Islam" (Wikipedia).
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
The Midge.
Radical.
Jesus agrees.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Midge:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Several attempts have been made on this thread to see this atrocity in the light of the Israeli/Palestinian problem, or the involvement of the US and its allies in the affairs of the Middle East.
Oh but it is. The West/ colonial powers has made enemies. Take British involvement for example: Egypt, Palestine, Pakistan, adventures in Afghanistan. Lots of other trouble spots on the map that used to be shaded in pink.
I think you have to be careful about lumping all Western countries together here. On the whole, French foreign policy towards Arab countries has been more friendly than is the case for many other Western powers. Large numbers of ethnically Arab people live in France (mostly North Africans, and some Syrians and Lebanese).
To wit: France famously did not join in the Iraq war (cheese-eating surrender monkeys etc. etc.). Basically, IMO, faced with a choice between pissing off the Americans or pissing off the Arabs, Jacques Chirac decided that he had more to lose by pissing off the Arabs.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
As to the part that Islamic notions of martyrdom play in suicide bombings I'll leave to your imagination.
You don't have to leave it your imagination. As already referred to, I'm aware of the studies of Robert Pape that show how suicide bombing was invented by non-Muslims and employed by people of all religious backgrounds as a tactic to drive out occupying forces, and completely ignored by Muslims in parts of the world that had no occupying forces to drive out.
But don't let facts and data get in the way of a good myth about religious fanatics and martyrdom.
Seriously? I'm well aware of the use of suicide in terrorism more widely but do you honestly think that the belief that martyrdom will be rewarded plays no part as an immediate motivation? Why don't we ask the perps? Just a slight problem - they killed themselves
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
quote:
Originally posted by The Midge:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Several attempts have been made on this thread to see this atrocity in the light of the Israeli/Palestinian problem, or the involvement of the US and its allies in the affairs of the Middle East.
Oh but it is. The West/ colonial powers has made enemies. Take British involvement for example: Egypt, Palestine, Pakistan, adventures in Afghanistan. Lots of other trouble spots on the map that used to be shaded in pink.
I think you have to be careful about lumping all Western countries together here. On the whole, French foreign policy towards Arab countries has been more friendly than is the case for many other Western powers. Large numbers of ethnically Arab people live in France (mostly North Africans, and some Syrians and Lebanese).
To wit: France famously did not join in the Iraq war (cheese-eating surrender monkeys etc. etc.). Basically, IMO, faced with a choice between pissing off the Americans or pissing off the Arabs, Jacques Chirac decided that he had more to lose by pissing off the Arabs.
I agree. Which is why I stuck to examples from my own nation's history. I can imagine why an Jihadist might reasons to dislike my nation.
France and England have been pissing each other off since...
Hopefully we now save it just for occasions like the Six Nations Rugby.
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
As to the part that Islamic notions of martyrdom play in suicide bombings I'll leave to your imagination.
You don't have to leave it your imagination. As already referred to, I'm aware of the studies of Robert Pape that show how suicide bombing was invented by non-Muslims and employed by people of all religious backgrounds as a tactic to drive out occupying forces, and completely ignored by Muslims in parts of the world that had no occupying forces to drive out.
But don't let facts and data get in the way of a good myth about religious fanatics and martyrdom.
Seriously? I'm well aware of the use of suicide in terrorism more widely but do you honestly think that the belief that martyrdom will be rewarded plays no part as an immediate motivation? Why don't we ask the perps? Just a slight problem - they killed themselves
And they never ever left videos or diaries or notes. Oh wait, I seem to remember that's what Professor Pape was using for his research.
Seriously. I honestly think that, because it's based on FACTS, not on memes thrown about on social media. The FACTS are that suicide bombers are usually middle class, better educated than their peers, and don't have a history of intense religiosity. The FACTS are that they're consistently angered by the presence of occupying forces.
These are the FACTS gathered from extensive research of hundreds upon hundreds cases. At the time that I first heard Professor Pape in a lecture quite some years ago, and he presented the FACTS, he and his team had researched every case of suicide bombing in the entire world up until the point where the incidence skyrocketed to unprecedented proportions in Iraq (almost entirely Muslims killing other Muslims). I haven't kept up to find out whether he's caught up since then.
But in every case, they had found out identities, backgrounds, religious history, economic status, social status.
It is simply not true that suicide bombers are a bunch of religious fanatics eager for paradise. No matter how fervently you believe that it's true, the FACTS don't agree with you.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I feel ashamed to be taking part in a forum where something so vile could be written; and a weird kind of shame that I had to read it. However, I guess that God may forgive such inhuman and inhumane sentiments.
OK so tell me what affinity you feel for people who react to press freedom with mass murder, just because the message offends them. Tell me who else behaves that way when subjected to the same treatment. The answer to the second question is no-one. What these people did is certainly alien to how I believe we should live.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
The French air force attacked Gaddafi and France banned the niqab. France has as bad an imperialist and hostile Christian response to Islam, if not one of the very longest, as any.
[ 08. January 2015, 22:52: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
Responsibility and reasonable behavior are irrelevant here unless your intention is to react to an attack on free speech by limiting free speech. We all have to live with the fact that satire and criticism is sometimes vile, vicious, and over-the-top. There are already laws which deal with incitement, defamation/libel etc.
Presumably you know that this publication's originated after a previous publication was banned. For making comments about Charles De Gaulle.
Interesting point in one sense, but in another, So What?
Even if the French government had suppressed or even imprisoned the editors of either Charlie Hebdo or its predecessor, even if the French government were to limit freedom of speech or allow it, that is of a minimal order in comparison with randomly killing a collection of people some working there and some not.
If the French state did suppress a previous magazine, I am sure it did not do so by invading its premises and shooting up its staff. That is the sort of thing the Third Reich did.
However offensive one might find a magazine, that does not allow one to kill people either at random or even if they happen to work for it.
The simple point is that these two young men have perpetrated an outrage for which there is no defence, justification or excuse. No explanation or speculation as to why they might have done it can get round that simple point. As an ethical conclusion, that is straightforward and indisputable. On that, there is no room for any discussion. There isn't really much that any of us can usefully say beyond that.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Tell me who else behaves that way when subjected to the same treatment. The answer to the second question is no-one.
Wow. So there were never any disappearances in Chile or Argentina, because, you know, non-Muslims just never react to press freedom by killing the press?
Good to know.
That was, by the way, just the first example that turned up in my head. I'm sure about 10 minutes research with an organisation focused on journalistic freedom would come up with myriads of examples of journalists who were kidnapped or murdered because of what they wrote.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Wow. So there were never any disappearances in Chile or Argentina, because, you know, non-Muslims just never react to press freedom by killing the press?
Neither Chile nor Argentina were democracies when those things were going on, and the terror was perpetrated by the state. It has no relevance to this question. These actions can't be defended, and I don't know why so much energy is being given to defending them. Islam believes it has the right to put a fatwa on anyone who insults the prophet. If they want to do that, or introduce sharia law in their own lands, then there's little we can do about it. But so far, they are in a minority in Western European countries, and there is no reason on God's earth why we should accept their FGM, their honour killings or their murderous fatwas on our streets. If quetzelcoatl or anyone else believes I need God's forgiveness for denouncing such behaviour as alien to the sort of country I would want to live in, then I disagree.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
orfeo--
The Committee To Protect Journalists might be useful in your arguments.
Indeed, it is excellent.
Have a read, PaulTH*. Click on a non-Muslim country on the map - Brazil or Mexico might be a good option for you. Click on the names of the murdered journalists. Have a read. Tell me again how only Muslims ever kill members of the press for printing things they don't like.
Tell me, for that matter, why the blazes why it matters whether a journalist is killed by someone with connection to the powers in that location or not.
You're also being obtuse if you think anyone is claiming the Paris massacre is defensible. All that anyone is claiming is that Islam is not some magic special ingredient that makes monsters out of an otherwise peace-loving species.
[ 09. January 2015, 01:10: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
By the way, seeing it has come up...
I know that this particular attack is not a suicide attack, but as there was a reference to suicide bombers I went looking to see what I could find.
This article, which is 13 pages long, is a very clear and articulate summary of the material presented by Robert Pape at a lecture in 2006 which I am 99% certain is part of the same lecture tour that I was able to attend (indeed, I suspect this would have been within a day of when I heard him speak).
This is not some fringe theory, this is a mainstream person whose research was funded by the US government and who advised the George W Bush administration on these issues and on better ways to achieve strategic interests in the Middle East.
This research is specifically about suicide bombing, not other terrorism. Nevertheless, it illustrates the point that thinking it's all about religious fundamentalism is not only mistaken, but dangerous. Thinking that the trouble will stop if only we can de-Islamify people is not accurate.
Let him who has eyes to read, read.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
All that anyone is claiming is that Islam is not some magic special ingredient that makes monsters out of an otherwise peace-loving species
So are you saying that there is no element to this that is purely Islamic? I can't agree with that. The "right" to kill people who insult the prophet, for example, is a purely Muslim concept. It's absurd to suggest that only Muslims perpetrate violence and terror, but a spokesman for MI5 said that three potentially fatal terror plots in the UK had been foiled in the last few months. We don't even need to ask if they are all Islamic plots.
There are things which, at least today, are purely Islamic. FGM, honour killings, fatwas for insulting the prophet (es Salman Rushdie). Forced marriages may not be exclusive to Islam, but would be the majority in the UK at least. There are these aspects of Islam which I find unacceptable in a democratic country. It's impossible to deny that the religious element plays a large part in this, and I reserve the right, as an individual, to say that I deplore the importation of these ideas into our democracy.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
The "right" to kill people who insult the prophet, for example, is a purely Muslim concept.
Well, sure. And the right to kill Jews because they killed Jesus is a purely Christian concept. So what?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
There are things which, at least today, are purely Islamic. FGM, honour killings, fatwas for insulting the prophet (es Salman Rushdie).
Oh really? quote:
Nigeria, due to its large population, has the highest absolute number of female genital mutilation (FGM) worldwide, accounting for about one-quarter of the estimated 115–130 million circumcised women in the world. [...] Practice of FGM has no relationship with religion. Muslims and Christians practice it, but it is more widely spread in Christian predominated parts of Nigeria
Also, probably not a lot of Muslims in Latin America. quote:
Similar to honor killings, crimes of passion often feature the murder of women by a husband, family member, or boyfriends and the crime is often condoned or sanctioned. In Peru, for example, 70 percent of the murders of women in one year were committed by a husband, boyfriend or lover, and most often jealousy or suspicions of infidelity are cited as the reasons for the murders.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DaveW:
Oh really?
You're missing my point. If Nigerian Christians practice FGM, or Peruvian men murder their wives, there's little we can do about it here, except protest in the strongest terms. If we want to stamp out FGM in the UK, we will be dealing exclusively with the Islamic community. Honour killings, often daughters who get attracted to the wrong man, are another problem peculiar to the Asian community, mostly Islamic. When I say that I object to having those objectionable things imported, again it will be almost entirely an Islamic problem.
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
And the right to kill Jews because they killed Jesus is a purely Christian concept. So what
This too misses my point. we stopped murdering Jews as Christ killers hundreds of years ago. I certainly deplore that it ever happened. But the "so what" is that this happened in Paris 36 hours ago. So Muslims still believe they have that right, and are therefore a danger. We don't.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
So you can't do anything about bad things in Peru or Nigeria, but you can do stuff about Paris?
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
If we want to stamp out FGM in the UK, we will be dealing exclusively with the Islamic community.
I see. Because only Muslim Nigerians practising FGM migrated to their colonial overlords, and Christian Nigerians mysteriously self-selected to leave all the FGM practitioners at home.
quote:
Honour killings, often daughters who get attracted to the wrong man, are another problem peculiar to the Asian community, mostly Islamic.
Yes, because Hindu India just disappeared from the equation for some reason.
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with asserting that there are problems here, but your insistence that these problems are particularly Muslim shows a remarkable resistance to facts. It's a classic case of confirmation bias whereby you only notice the stories that confirm what you already think about Islam.
Not that this is entirely your fault, because the media is doing a lot of this work for you. Stories that fit the existing meme get reported far more extensively than stories that don't.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
