| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| We Are Not All Charlie |
| 2015-01-09 |
| Calling un spade un spade, from the Atlantic of all places... [The Atlantic] ...We see a blue “Je Suis Charlie” sign on a lamppost. Very nice. But the sentiment is partially a conceit. We are not all Charlie. Much of Europe, which, as a political entity, is not fully grappling with the totalitarian madness of Islamism, is not Charlie. Charlie is, of course, racist. Ask Angela Merkel... Certainly much of journalism is not Charlie. Any outlet that censors Charlie Hebdo cartoons out of fear of Islamist reprisal is not Charlie. To publish the cartoons now is a necessary, but only moderately brave, act. We may put Charlie up with Breitbart on the 'Burg. We don't have room for all the non-journalism martyrs to the Religion of Peace®, the untold and usually unnamed victims of the oil-financed expasion of Wahhabism... Please remember: Even after Charlie Hebdo was firebombed in 2011, it continued to publish rude and funny satires mocking the essential ridiculousness of the Islamist worldview. That represented a genuine display of bravery. CNN, the Associated Press, and the many other media organizations that are cowering before the threat of totalitarian violence represent something other than bravery. I'd also suggest that turning out to protest the Islamicisation of Europe is also an act of bravery. Calling the people who do racists is not. Those turning out are met with "counter protesters," who're usually looking for a fight.. Here is someone who is not Charlie: Tony Barber, of the Financial Times, who wrote yesterday: “Charlie Hebdo has a long record of mocking, baiting and needling French Muslims. If the magazine stops just short of outright insults, it is nevertheless not the most convincing champion of the principle of freedom of speech. France is the land of Voltaire, but too often editorial foolishness has prevailed at Charlie Hebdo.” Principle is, of course, bunk. It is easy to satirize Christians. The last auto da fe was several hundred years ago. Bring it back and the number of urine-soaked crucifixes and Madonnas painted in dung will drop dramatically. Editorial foolishness! If they shot people who criticized Charlie that number would drop dramatically, too.... He went on: “This is not in the slightest to condone the murderers, who must be caught and punished, "No, no! Certainly not!"... or to suggest that freedom of expression should not extend to satirical portrayals of religion. "Certainly not! As long as they're not racist..."... It is merely to say that some common sense would be useful at publications such as Charlie Hebdo, and Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten, which purport to strike a blow for freedom when they provoke Muslims, but are actually just being stupid.” "See? Nobody's even tried to kill me! I ain't so dumb."... (Some of these lines have since been edited out of Barber's "expanded and updated" FT column without explanation.) "Don't criticize me, now! You know how badly that makes me feel!"... Stupid is in the eye of the beholder. To me, it seems stupid and self-destructive to let men with guns tell us what we can or cannot write, or read. I guess backing down gets easier with practice. Or never stepping up.... Do you know who else isn’t Charlie? Barack Obama isn’t Charlie. This is from a speech the president delivered to the United Nations General Assembly in 2012: The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.I wish President Obama had not said this, for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that the Holocaust is an historical fact, and church desecrations are physical crimes against property; neither vandalism nor the denial of historical reality compare to the mocking of unprovable religious beliefs. (And yes, I find attacks on the principles of my faith painful, but I would defend the right of people to make such attacks; I'm opposed, for instance, to the criminalization of Holocaust denial.) Feels a little uncomfortable, being in the same ideological corner, does it?... Mainly, Obama’s statement is troubling because it should be the role of the president of the United States, who swears an oath to defend the Constitution, to explain to the world the principle that free speech is sacred—painful, sometimes, but sacred. If the future does not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam—in other words, to people who speak freely and offensively—then it belongs to those who would suppress by force any criticism of religion. This is not an American idea, and it certainly isn’t Charlie. |
| Posted by: |
| #3 Tiring g(r)om, very tiring. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2015-01-09 06:58 |
| #2 "Je Suis Charles Martel" seems a lot more practical to me---maybe because we Jews been Charlie for 2000 years. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2015-01-09 04:42 |
| #1 Do you know who else isn’t Charlie? Barack Obama isn’t Charlie. This is from a speech the president delivered to the United Nations General Assembly in 2012: ....Spit ! A high drifter rode into Lago: "Good burghers, please leggo my Eggo! As we paint the town red, I shall loaf and be fed, Then retire and puff fat Don Diegos." Posted by Zenobia Floger6220 A Zen tribute from late yesterday. I just had to see it one more time. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2015-01-09 03:07 |