The ISIS threat to Europe

[peterms]

Aaronovitch on This Week seems to struggle with muslim communities coming out en masse for a demonstration against killings in palestine (for example) but not doing so today for 'Charlie' (perhaps they did but as French citizens rather than muslims - I don't know).Surely there's a horrible irony about the narrow occidental viewpoint that is the basis of this criticism?

Yes, they did demonstrate against the killings. There was a ceremony held (I believe) in the French Muslim HQ, attended by leaders of other faiths in a show of solidarity, and their religious leaders urged followers to take part in demonstrations. The brother of the murdered Muslim police officer urged fellow Muslims to demonstrate against this act.

This was all reported on the news feeds, to which Aaranovitch, as a professional journalist, has easy, free and effortless access. If he doesn't know this stuff, he is incompetent. If he knows and says it anyway, he is a lying propagandist. Either way, he demeans his trade.

[snowychap]

Yes, they did demonstrate against the killings. There was a ceremony held (I believe) in the French Muslim HQ, attended by leaders of other faiths in a show of solidarity, and their religious leaders urged followers to take part in demonstrations. The brother of the murdered Muslim police officer urged fellow Muslims to demonstrate against this act.

This was all reported on the news feeds, to which Aaranovitch, as a professional journalist, has easy, free and effortless access. If he doesn't know this stuff, he is incompetent. If he knows and says it anyway, he is a lying propagandist. Either way, he demeans his trade.

I'll need to go and check over the coverage in case I was wrong about his comments.

[peterms]

This was withdrawn from the Sydney Morning Herald last August, when Israeli death squads were murdering Palestinian children. An apology was offered for printing it, apparently.

I can easily see why Muslims feel there is a wholly hypocritical double standard about what is considered fair game.

[snowychap]

I can easily see why Muslims feel there is a wholly hypocritical double standard about what is considered fair game.

Isn't the point that Hebdo also supposedly ran these kinds of things against all religions?

Most news outlets didn't run the kind of cartoons or output of the french magazine (I was a little concerned by the comments from one of the contributors of newsnight about Hebdo's cartoon after the Boko Haram kidnappings, tbh), did they?

It seems a much more complicated issue even a day after than the crass 'war on civilization' comment of the likes of Sarkozy.

[LondonLax]

This was withdrawn from the Sydney Morning Herald last August, when Israeli death squads were murdering Palestinian children. An apology was offered for printing it, apparently.

I can easily see why Muslims feel there is a wholly hypocritical double standard about what is considered fair game.

 

 

The SMH hasn't run anything that would be considered offensive to Muslim groups as far as I'm aware, not sure how they can be accused of a double standard in the way you imply? 

[snowychap]

A blog that I came across. I'm not sure I agree with him much or totally but I thought it was well put (lots of missed out cartoons that are available through the links):

link

In the Wake of Charlie Hebdo, Free Speech Does Not Mean Freedom From Criticism

by Jacob Canfield

January 7, 2015 12:49 pm

On Wednesday morning, the French satirical paper Charlie Hebdo was attacked by three masked gunmen, armed with kalashnikovs, who stormed the building and killed ten of its staff and two police officers. The gunmen are currently understood to be Muslim extremists. This attack came minutes after the paper tweeted this drawing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi.

(“Best wishes, by the way.” Baghdadi: “And especially good health!”)

An armed attack on a newspaper is shocking, but it is not even the first time Hebdo has been the subject of terrorist attacks. Gawker has a good summary of past controversies and attacks involving Hebdo. Most famously, the magazine’s offices were firebombed in 2011, after they printed an issue depicting the Prophet Muhammad on the cover.

In the face of such an obvious attack on free speech, voicing anything except grief-stricken support is seen by many as disrespectful. Tom Spurgeon at The Comics Reporter, one of the first American comics sources to thoroughly cover the attack, quickly tweeted this:

...

When faced with a terrorist attack against a satirical newspaper, the appropriate response seems obvious. Don’t let the victims be silenced. Spread their work as far as it can possibly go. Laugh in the face of those savage murderers who don’t understand satire.

In this case, it is the wrong response.

Here’s what’s difficult to parse in the face of tragedy: yes, Charlie Hebdo is a French satirical newspaper. Its staff is white. Its cartoons often represent a certain, virulently racist brand of French xenophobia. While they generously claim to ‘attack everyone equally,’ the cartoons they publish are intentionally anti-Islam, and frequently sexist and homophobic.

Here, for context, are some of the cartoons they recently published.

...

(Yes, that last one depicts Boko Haram sex slaves as welfare queens.)

These are, by even the most generous assessment, incredibly racist cartoons. Hebdo’s goal is to provoke, and these cartoons make it very clear who the white editorial staff was interested in provoking: France’s incredibly marginalized, often attacked, Muslim immigrant community.

Even in a fresh-off-the-press, glowing BBC profile of Charb, Hebdo’s murdered editor, he comes across as a racist asshole.

Charb had strongly defended Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad.

“Muhammad isn’t sacred to me,” he told the Associated Press in 2012, after the magazine’s offices had been fire-bombed.

“I don’t blame Muslims for not laughing at our drawings. I live under French law. I don’t live under Koranic law.”

Now, I understand that calling someone a ‘racist asshole’ after their murder is a callous thing to do, and I don’t do it lightly. This isn’t ambiguous, though: the editorial staff of Hebdo consistently aimed to provoke Muslims. They ascribe to the same edgy-white-guy mentality that many American cartoonists do: nothing is sacred, sacred targets are funnier, lighten up, criticism is censorship. And just like American cartoonists, they and their supporters are wrong. White men punching down is not a recipe for good satire, and needs to be called out. People getting upset does not prove that the satire was good. And, this is the hardest part, the murder of the satirists in question does not prove that their satire was good. Their satire was bad, and remains bad. Their satire was racist, and remains racist.

The response to the attacks by hack cartoonists the world over has been swift. While many are able to keep pretty benign:

...

Several of the cartoons sweeping Twitter stooped to drawing hook-nosed Muslim caricatures, reminiscent of Hebdo’s house style.

...

Perhaps most offensively, this Shaw cartoon (incorrectly attributed to Robert Mankoff) from a few years back swept Twitter, paired with the hashtag #CharlieHebdo:

...

Political correctness did not kill twelve people at the Charlie Hebdo offices. To talk about the attack as an attack by “political correctness” is the most disgusting, self-serving martyr bullshit I can imagine. To invoke this (bad) Shaw cartoon in relation to the Hebdo murders is to assert that cartoons should never be criticized. To invoke this garbage cartoon is to assert that white, male cartoonists should never have to hear any complaints when they gleefully attack marginalized groups.

Changing your twitter avatar to a drawing of the Prophet Muhammad is a racist thing to do, even in the face of a terrorist attack. The attitude that Muslims need to be ‘punished’ is xenophobic and distressing. The statement, “JE SUIS CHARLIE” works to erase and ignore the magazine’s history of xenophobia, racism, and homophobia. For us to truly honor the victims of a terrorist attack on free speech, we must not spread hateful racism blithely, and we should not take pride in extreme attacks on oppressed and marginalized peoples.

...

is gross and inappropriate. To simplify the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices as “Good, Valiant Westerners vs. Evil, Savage Muslims” is not only racist, it’s dangerously overstated. Cartoonists (especially political cartoonists) generally reinforce the status quo, and they tend to be white men. Calling fellow cartoonists TO ARMS is calling other white men to arms against already marginalized people. The inevitable backlash against Muslims has begun in earnest.

...

This is the worst.

The fact that twelve people are dead over cartoons is hateful, and I can only pray that their attackers are brought to justice. Free speech is an important part of our society, but, it should always go without saying, free speech does not mean freedom from criticism. Criticism IS speech – to honor “free speech martyrs” by shouting down any criticism of their work is both ironic and depressing.

In summary:

Nobody should have been killed over those cartoons.

**** those cartoons.

- See more at: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:r6m7Up8qmNoJ:www.hoodedutilitarian.com/2015/01/in-the-wake-of-charlie-hebdo-free-speech-does-not-mean-freedom-from-criticism/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us#sthash.giKCfMsv.dpuf

I'd like to pick out one part of the above:

The fact that twelve people are dead over cartoons is hateful, and I can only pray that their attackers are brought to justice. Free speech is an important part of our society, but, it should always go without saying, free speech does not mean freedom from criticism. Criticism IS speech – to honor “free speech martyrs” by shouting down any criticism of their work is both ironic and depressing.

[YGabbana]

This was withdrawn from the Sydney Morning Herald last August, when Israeli death squads were murdering Palestinian children. An apology was offered for printing it, apparently.

I can easily see why Muslims feel there is a wholly hypocritical double standard about what is considered fair game.

Theres alot of hypocrasy for sure, for example Beth Din (Jewish law) is used here for certain disputes but when Muslims want to use sharia law it gets alot of media attention and turned into 'sharia law on our streets, taking over our country blah blah.

Crimes by other countries dont get as much media attention either like 50 odd civilians killed by drones in Yemen over the last month alone.

[bickster]

A blog that I came across. I'm not sure I agree with him much or totally but I thought it was well put (lots of missed out cartoons that are available through the links):

link

In the Wake of Charlie Hebdo, Free Speech Does Not Mean Freedom From Criticism

by Jacob Canfield

January 7, 2015 12:49 pm

On Wednesday morning, the French satirical paper Charlie Hebdo was attacked by three masked gunmen, armed with kalashnikovs, who stormed the building and killed ten of its staff and two police officers. The gunmen are currently understood to be Muslim extremists. This attack came minutes after the paper tweeted this drawing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi.

(“Best wishes, by the way.” Baghdadi: “And especially good health!”)

An armed attack on a newspaper is shocking, but it is not even the first time Hebdo has been the subject of terrorist attacks. Gawker has a good summary of past controversies and attacks involving Hebdo. Most famously, the magazine’s offices were firebombed in 2011, after they printed an issue depicting the Prophet Muhammad on the cover.

In the face of such an obvious attack on free speech, voicing anything except grief-stricken support is seen by many as disrespectful. Tom Spurgeon at The Comics Reporter, one of the first American comics sources to thoroughly cover the attack, quickly tweeted this:

...

When faced with a terrorist attack against a satirical newspaper, the appropriate response seems obvious. Don’t let the victims be silenced. Spread their work as far as it can possibly go. Laugh in the face of those savage murderers who don’t understand satire.

In this case, it is the wrong response.

Here’s what’s difficult to parse in the face of tragedy: yes, Charlie Hebdo is a French satirical newspaper. Its staff is white. Its cartoons often represent a certain, virulently racist brand of French xenophobia. While they generously claim to ‘attack everyone equally,’ the cartoons they publish are intentionally anti-Islam, and frequently sexist and homophobic.

Here, for context, are some of the cartoons they recently published.

...

(Yes, that last one depicts Boko Haram sex slaves as welfare queens.)

These are, by even the most generous assessment, incredibly racist cartoons. Hebdo’s goal is to provoke, and these cartoons make it very clear who the white editorial staff was interested in provoking: France’s incredibly marginalized, often attacked, Muslim immigrant community.

Even in a fresh-off-the-press, glowing BBC profile of Charb, Hebdo’s murdered editor, he comes across as a racist asshole.

Charb had strongly defended Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad.

“Muhammad isn’t sacred to me,” he told the Associated Press in 2012, after the magazine’s offices had been fire-bombed.

“I don’t blame Muslims for not laughing at our drawings. I live under French law. I don’t live under Koranic law.”

Now, I understand that calling someone a ‘racist asshole’ after their murder is a callous thing to do, and I don’t do it lightly. This isn’t ambiguous, though: the editorial staff of Hebdo consistently aimed to provoke Muslims. They ascribe to the same edgy-white-guy mentality that many American cartoonists do: nothing is sacred, sacred targets are funnier, lighten up, criticism is censorship. And just like American cartoonists, they and their supporters are wrong. White men punching down is not a recipe for good satire, and needs to be called out. People getting upset does not prove that the satire was good. And, this is the hardest part, the murder of the satirists in question does not prove that their satire was good. Their satire was bad, and remains bad. Their satire was racist, and remains racist.

The response to the attacks by hack cartoonists the world over has been swift. While many are able to keep pretty benign:

...

Several of the cartoons sweeping Twitter stooped to drawing hook-nosed Muslim caricatures, reminiscent of Hebdo’s house style.

...

Perhaps most offensively, this Shaw cartoon (incorrectly attributed to Robert Mankoff) from a few years back swept Twitter, paired with the hashtag #CharlieHebdo:

...

Political correctness did not kill twelve people at the Charlie Hebdo offices. To talk about the attack as an attack by “political correctness” is the most disgusting, self-serving martyr bullshit I can imagine. To invoke this (bad) Shaw cartoon in relation to the Hebdo murders is to assert that cartoons should never be criticized. To invoke this garbage cartoon is to assert that white, male cartoonists should never have to hear any complaints when they gleefully attack marginalized groups.

Changing your twitter avatar to a drawing of the Prophet Muhammad is a racist thing to do, even in the face of a terrorist attack. The attitude that Muslims need to be ‘punished’ is xenophobic and distressing. The statement, “JE SUIS CHARLIE” works to erase and ignore the magazine’s history of xenophobia, racism, and homophobia. For us to truly honor the victims of a terrorist attack on free speech, we must not spread hateful racism blithely, and we should not take pride in extreme attacks on oppressed and marginalized peoples.

...

is gross and inappropriate. To simplify the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices as “Good, Valiant Westerners vs. Evil, Savage Muslims” is not only racist, it’s dangerously overstated. Cartoonists (especially political cartoonists) generally reinforce the status quo, and they tend to be white men. Calling fellow cartoonists TO ARMS is calling other white men to arms against already marginalized people. The inevitable backlash against Muslims has begun in earnest.

...

This is the worst.

The fact that twelve people are dead over cartoons is hateful, and I can only pray that their attackers are brought to justice. Free speech is an important part of our society, but, it should always go without saying, free speech does not mean freedom from criticism. Criticism IS speech – to honor “free speech martyrs” by shouting down any criticism of their work is both ironic and depressing.

In summary:

Nobody should have been killed over those cartoons.

**** those cartoons.

- See more at: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:r6m7Up8qmNoJ:www.hoodedutilitarian.com/2015/01/in-the-wake-of-charlie-hebdo-free-speech-does-not-mean-freedom-from-criticism/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us#sthash.giKCfMsv.dpuf

I'd like to pick out one part of the above:

The fact that twelve people are dead over cartoons is hateful, and I can only pray that their attackers are brought to justice. Free speech is an important part of our society, but, it should always go without saying, free speech does not mean freedom from criticism. Criticism IS speech – to honor “free speech martyrs” by shouting down any criticism of their work is both ironic and depressing.

I think Mr cartoon should be informed that Muslims aren't a race. He falls into the criticism of Islam = racist trap

[Awol]

50 odd civilians killed by drones in Yemen over the last month alone.

Would be very grateful if you could source that number please, thanks in advance.

[Awol]

Confused reporting but it seems the two terrorists on the lamb have hijacked a vehicle, taken hostages and are involved in a police chase with shots fired.

[hogso]

'At least' one person killed and serveral injured according to Reuters. Seems like the two brothers have taken a/more than one hostage and a shoot out with police ensued in Dammartin-en-Goele

[Ads]

2 dead and 20 wounded apparently. Its not clear whether the dead are police or civilian hostages.

[Ads]

Bicks, we've had the whole racism/Islam malarkay only a few pages back.

[Ads]

They're surrounded in a printing warehouse apparently.

 

In about ten years time you're going to have blokes standing at the bar in barracks town bars and pubs telling anybody who will listen that they were the first one onto the balcony at the printing warehouse.

[bickster]

Bicks, we've had the whole racism/Islam malarkay only a few pages back.

And? Someone posted something that did it again, so I commented on it

[hogso]

Earlier reports that at least one person was killed are now being denied. The printworks/construction warehouse have some schools close by, they're being confined to the schools probably with police protection, everyone else in the town told to stay indoors.

[Ads]

 

Bicks, we've had the whole racism/Islam malarkay only a few pages back.

And? Someone posted something that did it again, so I commented on it

 

 

I think you misunderstood me. I was saying it had been mentioned recently in the sense that its one of those whack-a-mole points, that no matter how many times its hit on the head, it pops back up before too long.

[lapal_fan]

Hope they take them alive, although that's highly doubtful.

[mjmooney]

This was withdrawn from the Sydney Morning Herald last August, when Israeli death squads were murdering Palestinian children. An apology was offered for printing it, apparently.

I can easily see why Muslims feel there is a wholly hypocritical double standard about what is considered fair game.

Theres alot of hypocrasy for sure, for example Beth Din (Jewish law) is used here for certain disputes but when Muslims want to use sharia law it gets alot of media attention and turned into 'sharia law on our streets, taking over our country blah blah.

Crimes by other countries dont get as much media attention either like 50 odd civilians killed by drones in Yemen over the last month alone.

Second time you've raised the beth din thing. It's news to me, if true.

More information required.

[Chindie]

This was withdrawn from the Sydney Morning Herald last August, when Israeli death squads were murdering Palestinian children. An apology was offered for printing it, apparently.

I can easily see why Muslims feel there is a wholly hypocritical double standard about what is considered fair game.

Theres alot of hypocrasy for sure, for example Beth Din (Jewish law) is used here for certain disputes but when Muslims want to use sharia law it gets alot of media attention and turned into 'sharia law on our streets, taking over our country blah blah.

Crimes by other countries dont get as much media attention either like 50 odd civilians killed by drones in Yemen over the last month alone.

Second time you've raised the beth din thing. It's news to me, if true.

More information required.

It's correct although I think there's room to clarify what's said. Jewish courts are in usage in the UK and have been for years, but only on civil matters, where both parties agree to it, and of course it's all completely subject to UK law anyway.