Religion of Peace Strikes Again: Teacher beheaded in France after showing Mohammed cartoons

[Ludicus]

Was the meaning of your statement that Hebdo had published a disgusting cartoon featuring the murdered teacher and his funeral?

What I said is crystal clear: a disgusting cartoon showing two coffins, one for the body and other for the head. Is that funny? I don't think so. They don't respect nothing.

Also I asked if nearly everyone attacks and murders..

Only terrorists, obviously. And terror attacks aren't an exclusive of Islam extremists.
Center for Strategic et International Studies,SCIS,Islam and the Patterns in Terrorism and Violent Extremism ....

• First, the overwhelming majority of extremist and violent terrorist incidents do occur in largely Muslim states.
• Second, most of these incidents are perpetrated by a small minority of Muslims seeking power primarily in their own areas of operation and whose primary victims are fellow Muslims.

• Third, almost all of the governments of the countries involved are actively fighting extremism and terrorism, and most are allies of Western states that work closely with the security, military, and counterterrorism forces of non-Muslim states to fight extremism and terrorism.
• Fourth, the vast majority of Muslims oppose violent extremism and terrorism, and,
• Fifth, religion is only one of many factors that lead to instability and violence in largely Muslim states. It is a critical ideological force in shaping the current patterns of extremism, but it does not represent the core values of Islam and many other far more material factors help lead to the rise of extremism.

BUT, there is No “Clash of Civilizations.” The Vast Majority of Muslims Consistently Reject Extremism and Terrorism

Macron recently said."The caricatures are not a governmental project, but emerged from free and independent newspapers that are not affiliated with the government,”

And yet , a giant cartoon of of the Prophet Mohammad was projected onto government buildings in France. The Breitbart rejubilates,in anticipation of an eventual Christian crusade,

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Aexodus]

What does you disliking a magazine cover have to do with anything?

[Genava]

And yet , a giant cartoon of of the Prophet Mohammad was projected onto government buildings in France. The Breitbart rejubilates,in anticipation of an eventual Christian crusade,

The region decided this. Not Macron's government.

And I don't understand your reasoning. Macron said the caricatures aren't a part of any project made by the government, which is totally correct. I don't see the issue with local municipalities, regional institutions or anything else to support the right to caricature after a serie of terrorist attacks by displaying such caricature.

This is not China.

[Vanoi]

The region decided this. Not Macron's government.

And I don't understand your reasoning. Macron said the caricatures aren't a part of any project made by the government, which is totally correct. I don't see the issue with local municipalities, regional institutions or anything else to support the right to caricature after a serie of terrorist attacks by displaying such caricature.

This is not China.

This 100%.

People need to stop excusing the behavior of terrorists. Plenty of Muslims around the world have seen pictures of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad and have not felt the need or want to go behead or kill innocent people.

[Infidel144]

What I said is crystal clear: a disgusting cartoon showing two coffins, one for the body and other for the head. Is that funny? I don't think so. They don't respect nothing.

So, the meaning of your statement was that Hebdo had published a disgusting cartoon featuring the murdered teacher and his funeral.

Which goes back to my question: how long before teachers go and kill Hebdo staffers because of the disgusting cartoon?

Only terrorists, obviously. And terror attacks aren't an exclusive of Islam extremists.

Since, per your post, Charlie Hebdo "take on or offend nearly everyone" to include mothers and Jews...
What other "terrorists" have attacked and murdered Hebdo staffers because of cartoons?

[Ludicus]

So, the meaning of your statement was that Hebdo had published a disgusting cartoon featuring the murdered teacher and his funeral.

No , the obvious meaning of my statement is that Hebdo published a disgusting cartoon showing two coffins, one for the head and other for the body, to make a tasteless fun of the victim.

other "terrorists" have attacked and murdered Hebdo staffers because of cartoons?

Rearead my last post,

Religion is only one of many factors that lead to instability and violence in largely Muslim states. ..it is a critical ideological force in shaping the current patterns of extremism, but it does not represent the core values of Islam and many other far more material factors help lead to the rise of extremism.

According to Infidel144, it seems that terrorists are always Muslim, never White or Christian. No, Christian terrorism is not an unicorn.

Now, let's take a look at the thread "What is Islam?",rearead Infidel144's absurd answer to Abdulmecid: #70

Then of course there is this bit of ignorant or deceitful nonsense Abdulmecid supplied in post #24:

Osama bin Laden had been crystal clear on his motivations for the attack: Zionism, US military presence in Saudi Arabia and human rights abuses in Kashmir, Lebanon, Iraq, Chechnya and elsewhere. His reasoning was purely geopolitical and not religious.

Abdulmecid is right, it was not a religious based decision. In this case, Charlie Hebdo is proud to provoke Islam. In Europe, there are hate speech laws.For example, Austria has a law against "disparaging religious doctrines" E.S.v. Austria - Global ... - Global Freedom of Expression

The European Court of Human Rights held that the Austrian courts had appropriately balanced the rights to freedom of religion and expression by convicting a woman for “disparaging religious doctrines” after she held a series of seminars in which she described Islam prophet Muhammed as a paedophile.
The woman argued that her rights under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been infringed. Relying on its margin of appreciation doctrine, the Court ruled that the domestic courts had been right in holding that the interference with the right of freedom of expression was justified to protect the peacefulco-existence of different religions in society.

As the law rules, an act aimed directly at offending a religion (in this case the cartoons) undermines the civil societies and endanger peaceful coexistence between peoples and religions. Let’s keep in mind that Holocaust denial is illegal in 16 countries of Europe, and this includes the radical secular France. As I keep repeating ad nausea, the Holocaust trivialization and denial is the hallmark of an antisemite.The special adviser to Pakistan’s prime minister rightly said,

These representations of the Prophet are not satire, art, or free speeech. They are glaring similar in their deshumanization to the blood libel which has been used by anti-semites for centuries

That’s my point of view, and I’m not a religious person. Religions don't deserve special treatment, but all religions deserve respect. That is to say, I’m not Charlie Hebdo. Apart from that, the fight against terrorism -any kind of terrorism- is, obviously, a crucial priority for all countries.

I don't see the issue with local municipalities, regional institutions or anything else to support the right to caricature after a serie of terrorist attacks by displaying such caricature

Nah, in a radical secular France, the idea is to support, in an official way, the "rigth" to offend a religion.In doubt ask Israel, the Israeli law acknowledges claims about offences to religious feelings.The idea is to protect a person’s right to the integrity of his or her cultural identity.

PDF Offences to religious feelings in Israel: A theoretical ...

Muslims have argued that these cartoons desecrate their deeply cherished religious values (Emon, 2007) and offend their religious feelings (Haarscher,2008: 1233–43).But Muslims’ arguments about their offended religious feelings were largely dismissed as sentimental claims, which have no independent legal status and which are in any case outweighed by the value of freedom of expression (for such a view see Dworkin, 2006). In Israel, the independent status of claims of offence against feelings is well- established

People need to stop excusing the behavior of terrorists. Plenty of Muslims around the world have seen pictures of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad and have not felt the need or want to go behead or kill innocent people.

Who are you talking about? but thanks for echoing my words: the vast majority of Muslims oppose violent extremism and terrorism.It means that Islam is not a religion of agression.

[Vanoi]

And yet you continue to critcize Marcon and France over their cartoons. They're were not hate speech and the vast majority of Muslims as you and i have both mentioned, are not violent and would not act over these images.

And yet you criticize the cartoons as hate speech as if these cartoons are compelling Muslims to behead and attack people.

You are simply taking the responsibility out of the hands of terrorists and acting as if France is to blame for what as occured.

[Genava]

Who are you talking about? but thanks for echoing my words: the vast majority of Muslims oppose violent extremism and terrorism. It means that Islam is not a religion of agression.

I don't think by essence a religion is better or worse than another, I think the religious people are the most significant and varying parameter. For the same religion, the average practice varied considerably across time. And it is varying a lot among the same population at the same instant.
The majority of Muslims opposes violent extremism but still:

"Asked more broadly about their relationship to religion, Muslims are twice as likely (40%) than all French people (17%) to put their religious convictions before the values of the Republic, knowing that this proportion is very large majority among young Muslims under 25 (74%)."

Young Muslims are particularly worrying:
"A quarter of young Muslims (26%) under 25 do not explicitly condemn the perpetrators of the attacks of January 7, 2015"

https://www.ifop.com/publication/dro...ncore-charlie/

[Infidel144]

No , the obvious meaning of my statement is that Hebdo published a disgusting cartoon showing two coffins, one for the head and other for the body, to make a tasteless fun of the victim.

I'm failing to see any meaningful difference, much less a "completely different meaning".

Rearead my last post,

Okay.
[...]
Done.
So, how long before teachers go and kill Hebdo staffers because of the disgusting cartoon?

According to Infidel144, it seems that terrorists are always Muslim, never White or Christian. No, Christian terrorism is not an unicorn.

I don't think I have ever said that. In fact, I tend to refrain from using the term terrorist or terrorism.
Has Charlie Hebdo done offensive cartoons directed at Christianity?

Now, let's take a look at the thread "What is Islam?",rearead Infidel144's absurd answer to Abdulmecid: #70

That would be where Abdulmecid claims that Bin Laden reasoning for the attacks are purely geopolitical and not religious.

Abdulmecid is right, it was not a religious based decision.

Except of course I, for some no doubt absurd reason, actually quote Bin Laden. Indeed somewhat extensively in that thread, see also posts 30 and 48.
Bin Laden: "The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam."
Not even a microscopic scintilla of religion in Bin Laden's reasoning...

In this case, Charlie Hebdo is proud to provoke Islam.

You have stated that Hebdo "take on or offend nearly everyone."
Is Hebdo proud of those cartoons of "nearly everyone" as well?
Does "nearly everyone" murder Hebdo staffers in response to cartoons that offend "nearly everyone"?

In Europe, there are hate speech laws.For example, Austria has a law against "disparaging religious doctrines" E.S.v. Austria - Global ... - Global Freedom of Expression

I know. Horrible isn't it. Something to be expected from communazis and their ilk...
Is France Austria?

As the law rules, an act aimed directly at offending a religion (in this case the cartoons) undermines the civil societies and endanger peaceful coexistence between peoples and religions. Let’s keep in mind that Holocaust denial is illegal in 16 countries of Europe, and this includes the radical secular France. As I keep repeating ad nausea, the Holocaust trivialization and denial is the hallmark of an antisemite.The special adviser to Pakistan’s prime minister rightly said,
That’s my point of view, and I’m not a religious person. Religions don't deserve special treatment, but all religions deserve respect.

i.e. special treatment...

That is to say, I’m not Charlie Hebdo. Apart from that, the fight against terrorism -any kind of terrorism- is, obviously, a crucial priority for all countries.

[Knight of Heaven]

No , the obvious meaning of my statement is that Hebdo published a disgusting cartoon showing two coffins, one for the head and other for the body, to make a tasteless fun of the victim.

This is disingenuous. It wasn't the victim they were making fun. Also we could argue if it was in good or bad taste, if it was funny or not, if it was provocative or not in the end the answer should be always the same in a free society.

And that would be a stance against censorship of satirical content. And i would add if it doesn't provoke in some way in the first place, then its not doing its job as satire.

[Cope]

And yet you continue to critcize Marcon and France over their cartoons. They're were not hate speech and the vast majority of Muslims as you and i have both mentioned, are not violent and would not act over these images.

And yet you criticize the cartoons as hate speech as if these cartoons are compelling Muslims to behead and attack people.

You are simply taking the responsibility out of the hands of terrorists and acting as if France is to blame for what as occured.

Elements of the radical left (noting that there is a strong tradition of libertarian leftism in France) view the Hebdo cartoons as an extension of western "imperialism", the Arab-Israeli conflict and the perceived threat of the Rassemblement national. In short, they do think that France is to blame.

[dogukan]

Stop generalizing a "radical left". Radical left is not pro-Islam.
This is from your Western rights perspective.

Throughout the Muslim world and even in the USSR, left,or atleast, "left political identities" had been at war with Islam.
The secularist vs Islamist struggle is led by left-leaning folk.

You guys seem to forget that Islamism represents the "far right" in the political context. When you try to create a dichotomy between pro-Islam left vs protector of West right, it distorts the reality.
The use of left vs right have created a severely problematic understanding of complexity in politics.

Yes, the European left and liberals had been more accomodative of Islam, because in their secular mind, Islam is just another category of religion that should get equal treatment. And in practice, this turned into some fiercely protecting Islam against Western conservatives purely due to polarized black and white nature of the politics over there. It is simply a result of people taking sides based on what do people I like say and I don't like say rather than taking a stance based on civic values.
That is the problem of dying democracy, growing left and right populism and consequence of polarization.

Something the West needs to adress ASAP. The Muslim will not destroy the West, but the war over what to do about Islam between the polarized sides will...

[Cope]

Stop generalizing a "radical left". Radical left is not pro-Islam.
This is from your Western rights perspective.

Throughout the Muslim world and even in the USSR, left,or atleast, "left political identities" had been at war with Islam.
The secularist vs Islamist struggle is led by left-leaning folk.

You guys seem to forget that Islamism represents the "far right" in the political context. When you try to create a dichotomy between pro-Islam left vs protector of West right, it distorts the reality.
The use of left vs right have created a severely problematic understanding of complexity in politics.

Yes, the European left and liberals had been more accomodative of Islam, because in their secular mind, Islam is just another category of religion that should get equal treatment. And in practice, this turned into some fiercely protecting Islam against Western conservatives purely due to polarized black and white nature of the politics over there. It is simply a result of people taking sides based on what do people I like say and I don't like say rather than taking a stance based on civic values.
That is the problem of dying democracy, growing left and right populism and consequence of polarization.

Something the West needs to adress ASAP. The Muslim will not destroy the West, but the war over what to do about Islam between the polarized sides will...

I specifically stated that I was referring only to elements of the radical left and acknowledged that there was a strong tradition of libertarian leftism in France (of which Charlie Hebdo is a part). It is a matter of political utility for some to tacitly excuse Islamic terror attacks, blame the victimized society and/or demand the curtailment of freedoms.

[Ludicus]

And yet you continue to criticize Marcon...

That was the first thing I said. Everything I said- and more

France targets radical Islam BBC

Laurent Mucchielli, a sociologist at France's National Centre for Scientific Research, says that President Macron and his government have"overreacted" for political reasons; specifically, the presidential election in 2022.
"Macron is adding fuel to the fire," Mr Mucchielli said. "He doesn't want to appear on the back foot, compared to the right and the far right. His main goal is to get re-elected in 2022, so he needs to occupy the ground of the far right.

------
In France, more than anywhere else in Europe,social and economic misery in many French suburbs and ghettoization has progressively installed itself before becoming fanaticcaly ideological and identitarian. In fact, Macron wants to fix France's social ills – but he won't do it by"reforming Islam"

The French president needed to stay calm in the face of terror attacks. Instead, he has bowed to patriotic passions.

When it came to proposing remedies, however, Macron played down France’s responsibility, perhaps because he had already rejected an ambitious approach that he himself had once advocated. Early in his presidency he had assigned Jean-Louis Borloo to look into the problems of France’s suburban ghettos only to dismiss the report submitted in 2018.

He did briefly acknowledge one key element of the Borloo report,conceding that “radical change” was needed in France’s social housing. He devoted much more attention, however, to the alleged shortcomings of Muslim schools and mosques.

Yet regardless of what such small-bore regulatory measures may accomplish, it is hard to believe that they will do much to advance the other aspects of Macron’s five-point programme, namely, to create an “enlightened Islam” in France and“to make the Republic once again beloved” by its citizens.

What Macron has failed to notice is that these two tenets stand inopposition to each other. To “enlighten” religion is to quench the passions of faith with cool reason, while inflaming patriotic passions with talk of war achieves precisely the opposite.

France's Showdown with the Islamic World

The New York Times was highly critical of Macron’s plans, writing of a “broad government crackdown against Muslim individuals and groups.”

American sociologist Crystal Fleming, an expert on white supremacist groups,tweeted: “It is beyond sad to see French officials respond to violent extremism with violent extremism…”
Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin used the language of the hard right,describing France as fighting a “civil war” to defend the French secular and unitary Republic against the “separatist” teachings of extremist Islam. Darmanin suggested that ethnic food aisles in supermarkets be closed—inother words, punish innocent French Muslims as well as guilty ones.

Macron is heading into a 2022 election campaign, and expects to succeed where his predecessors failed.
He might have bet on the wrong horse, however.
Defeating radical Islam needs strong action, but Western governments must try to find a path of compromise to break the cycle of reaction and counter-reaction that creates more extremism and violence.
Considering how fragile the situation in France has become, as well as the anger that has developed between Paris and Arab and Muslim states, there appears to be a high probability of a new wave of radical Islamist terror operations against France and France-related assets.
The rage directed toward Macron’s statements, which are being taken as evidence of French Islamophobia, creates a common denominator between Sunnis and Shiites, in that both streams feel hurt and humiliated.

It is always possible possible to condemn radical violence without giving official and political endorsement to those who defame/vilify religions- in this case the cheap and tasteless humor of the provocative, inflamatory cartoons.
Ask yourself why we are not allowed to post here the Hebdo, pornographic cartoons.

[Vanoi]

So more blaming France but not the men who committed these attacks?

Cartoons are cartoons. If you feel offended enough to kill someone over it, you are the problem.

I'll repeat myself. Stop taking the responsibility out if the hands of terrorists. They made a choice and that choice was theres alone regardless of any comments made by Marcon or a cartoon.

[PointOfViewGun]

No one is taking the responsibility out of the attacker's hands. It's petty and lazy argumentation to suggest that. It serves no purpose. Life doesn't in such instance specific manner as well. There is progression. How people react to crisis matters, especially for those that are officials of a country.

[Vanoi]

No one is taking the responsibility out of the attacker's hands. It's petty and lazy argumentation to suggest that. It serves no purpose. Life doesn't in such instance specific manner as well. There is progression. How people react to crisis matters, especially for those that are officials of a country.

The minute you blame Marcon and the cartoons you are simply being an apologist. Marcon reaction was to condemn the attack and defend his country's right of free expression.

I'll say it again. If Marcon's comments offend you so much to the point of killing somebody over it, you are the problem.

[Infidel144]

The minute you blame Marcon and the cartoons you are simply being an apologist. Marcon reaction was to condemn the attack and defend his country's right of free expression.

I'll say it again. If Marcon's comments offend you so much to the point of killing somebody over it, you are the problem.

Is saying in response to people getting beheaded that it is exactly what Macron wanted blaming Macron?

[Cope]

There is certainly a self-refuting (and insulting) argument made by apologists that Muslims are neither irrational, radical nor violent, but that if they're exposed to offensive speech they will justifiably become so.

[PointOfViewGun]

There is certainly a self-refuting (and insulting) argument made by apologists that Muslims are neither irrational, radical nor violent, but that if they're exposed to offensive speech they will justifiably become so.

No one really makes such an argument. It is, however, way too common for people to make up arguments nobody really makes to create positions they can argue against. They usually do that to allow entertainment of cultural biases.