1fps-warlock
Banned
I mostly agree with the first sentence, not sure about the rest, however..
If we're going to troll, we better do it properly.
Terrorist attack on French satirical magazine
- Thread starter Akratus
- Start date
I mostly agree with the first sentence, not sure about the rest, however..
Gonzalez
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Yup, one of them even left his ID in the car, sloppy. Now it even seems they were not only muslim fundamentalists, but that they also fought to overthrow Assad in Syria. I wonder if the weapons they used in the shooting were the same supplied by the French govenrment to the rebels, or maybe they were US supplied.
MutantScalper
Dogmeat
Yes...The west was happy to watch with glee when the Syrian conflict ground on. Now, with Isis 'changing the rules', they are not so happy anymore. 1 life in the west is more valuable then thousands in the east.
1fps-warlock
Banned
I watched this thread for a while, there's a picture of AK and I doubt that AKs come from the states.
We wouldn't have had this problem if hitler won.
Acquaintance of mine makes (very left learning) political cartoons/comics here in Denmark.
Saw in a facebook post this morning that he apparently met one of victims last year, Tignous. Describes him as "ardent anti-racist" and having "no ill will towards religious people" but still insisting on being able to "draw whatever and whomever he likes". (and trust me when I say that this guy calling someone an "ardent anti-racist" is not a trifling matter)
Take this as you all may, I thought it was interesting. And, well, sad.
Also, unrelated observations that I hope wont derail the thread:
"totalbiscuit is dumb for criticizing the femfreq channel because it's under attack and he adds fuel to the fire"
"calling charlie hebdo a bigoted institution is important even though the bodies of a religious attack are still warm"
"criticizing religion is important and good"
"cultural critique is ruining gaming and should stop"
Saw in a facebook post this morning that he apparently met one of victims last year, Tignous. Describes him as "ardent anti-racist" and having "no ill will towards religious people" but still insisting on being able to "draw whatever and whomever he likes". (and trust me when I say that this guy calling someone an "ardent anti-racist" is not a trifling matter)
Take this as you all may, I thought it was interesting. And, well, sad.
Also, unrelated observations that I hope wont derail the thread:
To add to that:I like how there's basically exactly the same arguments in the Gamergate thread being made
"Don't judge a group of people by their extremists!" -"But the masses condone evil stuff!" -"But it's not what they believe in!" -"But we need to criticise them!"
"totalbiscuit is dumb for criticizing the femfreq channel because it's under attack and he adds fuel to the fire"
"calling charlie hebdo a bigoted institution is important even though the bodies of a religious attack are still warm"
"criticizing religion is important and good"
"cultural critique is ruining gaming and should stop"
Last edited:
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
Sorry Sander, You've depleted my sanity stat too much, for me to engage in this discussion.
Suffice it to say: Criticism of parts of Islamic religion =/= criticism of all of Islam, or all Muslims.
Suffice it to say: Criticism of parts of Islamic religion =/= criticism of all of Islam, or all Muslims.
Tell this to the pilots that bombed the Iraq or Afghanistan into the stone age while their president was throwing around tantrums like in god we trust or when the Obama administration is holding people without a setence in Guantanamo prison outside of the US jurisdiction and sending drone attacks around the world breaching the sovereignty of foreign nations to kill suspects. Freedomfighters for some. Terrorists for others. In their eyes WE are the terrorists. And sometimes I believe they are not even that far off ...
Seriously. Is it really THAT unbelievable or inconceivable why certain groups over the world hate us based on such highly questionable actions? We are doing right now the same anyway, throwing a whole religion in one pot because of the actions of a few. We demand from those groups and crazy lunatics the same kind of understanding that we denny to the Islam and nations.
Obviously this isn't working really well.
This stuff happens because our politicians and military leaders are assholes, hypocrites and bombing the shit out of people on a daily basis that have no other way to respond. Not because we don't blame the Islam. There is a conection between our politics and such people. As a Serbian I know what I am talking about.
And than you have cases where people are just simply crazy. Like Brevik. And when that happens, there is NOTHING you can really do about it. As sad as it sounds. But you can't really prevent people from beeing crazy, sick or nuts, like you can't prevent car accidents, no matter how save cars are or how good the laws are. They still happen. Yet, some people act like we could change this somehow. We are dealing with people here, not machines. As long as you cant controll thoughts you can't prevent those things from happening. Ban guns, and they use knives or cars. Or they will get those illegaly or make their own explosives.
The difference is, if someone is using his car to drive in a crowd of people killing 10 or 20 of them in the name of God because Jesus told him to do it, than we call him a mentaly sick person. Though if a muslim kills someone for Allah, for some reason we make it always a religous motivated attack which demands a stronger stance against immigrants and the Islam.
It still happens that the US is selling AK rifles trough various sources. Stocks from previous wars for example or captured weapons and so on and so forth, this is also true for France and Britain which are next to Germany some of the biggest arms dealers in the world.
Groups which stoped to fight against each other for example in Africa suddenly have a huge stockpile of old AK rifles and no money and someone from somewhere is buying those weapons and selling those to others.
During the 80s the US government used Isralian contacts to sell Russian/Soviet weapons to Islamic Afghan rebells. Go figure.
And this is methodical for maaaaaaaaaany of the conflicts around this world. Our governments (not just the US) support certain organisations, very often radical regimes or extemist groups because it serves our purpose, I am curious how many people know about the French involvement in the Rwandan Genocide by the way where 1 milion Africans died. Our nations (France included) earn a fuck ton of money with ISIS and many other groups fighting each other, ministers and politicans which not uncommonly have conections with the companies manufacturing and selling said weapons.
We earn money by people killing each other. It is no surprise that such actions at some point come back to bit us. Particularly when those groups stop to fight and some of them realize, hey? Why are they selling the same weapons to my enemy?
So we give them the weapons. We teach them the tactics. We supply them with explosives. And 10 or even 20 years later when they win or move out of the area because they lost sometimes even because we stoped to support them like the rebells in Iraq when they fought against Sadam, we are surprised that those crazy lunatics use said tactics and weapons against us. Like the Taliban.
Attacks against us most of the time don't happen in some kind of vacuum.
Last edited:
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/01/07/je-suis-charlie-no-youre-not-or-else-you
Yeah, defending Charlie Hebdo as paragons of free speech is tootally overdoing it. .
Yeah, defending Charlie Hebdo as paragons of free speech is tootally overdoing it. .
SnapSlav
NMA's local DotA fanatic
This time around, follow through with departing from the one-sided discourse. You can do it! =)
Here's hoping making an ENCOURAGEMENT post smaller will result in leaving it untouched, this time.
naossano
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Not sure it is entirely related to recent event.
A few years back, Charlie Hebdo released a series of drawing/caricature that attracted the hate of many muslim around the world, peaceful and extremists. In the following years/months received many death threat, their website was hacked, they suffered many minor attack (molotov in the office, but no dead, for instance).
Now, they managed to killed to most influental members of Charlie Hebdo, a very wide know (at least in France) people, that were already famous decades ago, most of them were involved in the famous controversial drawings. One of them was even retired at that time. The fact that they were all there that day isn't a coïncidence. It proves that the operation was well prepared, with possible help from inside Charlie Hebdo.
It is possible that it took them a lot of time to organize it. Which kind of support the fact that case is more related to the drawing than the current France involvement in Mali/Irak/Syria.
Akratus > Nobody is a parangon.
A few years back, Charlie Hebdo released a series of drawing/caricature that attracted the hate of many muslim around the world, peaceful and extremists. In the following years/months received many death threat, their website was hacked, they suffered many minor attack (molotov in the office, but no dead, for instance).
Now, they managed to killed to most influental members of Charlie Hebdo, a very wide know (at least in France) people, that were already famous decades ago, most of them were involved in the famous controversial drawings. One of them was even retired at that time. The fact that they were all there that day isn't a coïncidence. It proves that the operation was well prepared, with possible help from inside Charlie Hebdo.
It is possible that it took them a lot of time to organize it. Which kind of support the fact that case is more related to the drawing than the current France involvement in Mali/Irak/Syria.
Akratus > Nobody is a parangon.
Nas92
It Wandered In From the Wastes
That's fine and respectable, but talk is of little help to the people being murdered.
No, not really. Instutionalised shaming is the lesser evil. By which I mean politics acknowledging "this is a muslim problem" and thus putting pressure on the European muslim community and also making the terrorists aware that being liberal doesn't mean lying down and taking it. As I've said before, if the politically correct approach goes on for long, there will probably be a civil war of some kind.
Yes, that's all true. However, it's consistently shown throughout the show that the policies that were against oppression only resulted in more crime and crappier police work. See the whole running around in circles about having to appease black ministers by not removing Burrell, not being able to move against Clay Davis, and the like. David Simon also isn't against calling out entire communitites, see Maurie Levy (and he actually did say that was a jab at jewish lawyers, I'm certain of it).
hyperbole much?
I am more afraid of the right wing movements gaining power in Europe than any muslim invasion or civil war or what ever.
It is an extremist problem. 44 MILLION Muslims in Europe (and 1.6 BILLION Muslims over the world) are not responsible for a couple of crazy people. All of those communities are and have been very involved in actively trying to stop any radicalizing they can. They already shame. They already denounce. What you're suggesting is already happening. Has been for decades.
And the "politically correct" approach has never been tried. Muslims have always been marginalized in Europe. This has only gotten much, much worse over the past decades. If you think the issue is that Europe is too nice to its Muslim citizens, you are living in a fantasy world.
Again: further oppression does not lead to less radicalization, and that should be blindingly obvious to anyone who thinks about it for three seconds.
It's not about tolerant policies, it's about institutional corruption -- about people using the system to get ahead, rather than to do what it was supposed to do. None of the corrupted policies are "tolerant", they're simply there, and they run the gamut. The common thread throughout is that application of policies for personal gain leads to institutions serving only those in the institutions, not those the institutions are supposed to serve, and that impersonal institutions lose sight of humanity and individual pain. And one of the other common threads is the way impersonal institutions tend to oppress black people, and how all of that corruption tends to come at the cost of black people.Nas92 said:
Islamophobia is built on going "I'm only criticizing that part of Islam" and then drawing large conclusions about Muslims as a group (or just going "yeah well enough Muslims believe it to just treat all of them differently"). Geert Wilders isn't going "Hey this specific part of Islam is problematic" -- he's calling the entire religion a violent, hateful creed. He's calling for the banning of the Qu'ran and the tearing down of mosques and the deportation of Muslims. And that's something we see all over Europe -- it's not an uncommon sentiment at all.Akratus said:
I never said TB is dumb for critiquing Sarkeesian. Critique is fine. The issue was his continued minimization of the problem of harassment (and a secondary point was that his critique was dumb/false).PlanHex said:
Cimmerian Nights
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
12 People got murdered for cartoons, in an attack on free speech, who's being oppressed here?
We don't justify the neo-nazis reaction as a natural consequence of this shit, why give anyone else a free pass? Double standard homie.
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
Anti-gamergate is built on going "I'm only criticizing that part of GmaerGate" and then drawing large conclusions about Gamergate as a group (or just going "yeah well enough Gamergaters believe it to just treat all of them differently")
(Also yeah Geert Wilder is a moron. He went on TV to talk about how the attack was more of an attack on "western freedom" than an actual massacre. Way to make it all about how "your side" feels attacked bro. The facts are obviously not as important as how threatened you feel, which is obviously more important than an actual real-life god damn massacre. /rant)
(Also yeah Geert Wilder is a moron. He went on TV to talk about how the attack was more of an attack on "western freedom" than an actual massacre. Way to make it all about how "your side" feels attacked bro. The facts are obviously not as important as how threatened you feel, which is obviously more important than an actual real-life god damn massacre. /rant)
Muslims. In Europe. Every day.
No one's giving them a pass, or justifying them. Everyone's condemning them. Including every European community of Muslims I know of. There's no double standard, because there's no justification. There's just noting that this attack was horrific, and that Islamophobia is still a massive problem.Cimmerian Nights said:
@Akratus: Geert Wilders is not just a moron. He's someone who represents a very large portion of the Dutch population, and his attitude is also representative of lots of French, British, Belgian and other European citizens. This widespread Islamophobia is a massive problem.
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
I have no idea how widespread it is, but some acquaintances of mine are very anti-immigration and go on about how their taxes go to Moroccans. Really gets on my nerves. Thankfully I don't really deal with them at all in daily life. Oh but I did see an interview once with some random guy on the street, on the NOS, where they asked him who he voted for. "The PVV." "Why?" "To get rid of the foreigners, of course!" That was like having reality thrown in one's face for a younger me. Wasn't aware anyone could be that stupid.
I have to deal with them on the Codex though, hooo boy.
Last edited:
PVV is polling as the largest party in the country. Front National is leading presidential polls in France. UKIP has made massive gains in the UK. Islamophobia is extremely widespread.
But yes, you're correct. You have the luxury of not having to deal with that in daily life. Many Muslim Europeans and Moroccan Europeans do not.
This can be clearly seen in Syria and Iraq where pretty much all the fighting on the ground is done by ... Kurds. Who are perceived as terrorists by a large part of "all those communities" you're alluding to.
So yeah, BS.
They showed a class debate about the attack on the news this afternoon: moderate muslim children in Belgium are not shocked by this terrorist act. 'Everybody knows you shouldn't portray Muhammed,' was all they could say. No 'we have to defend freedom of press' or 'making fun of religious zealots should be allowed'.
And why should they? Muslim fundamentalists aren't the only group demanding that certain words, certain behaviour should be forbidden. So do feminists, homosexuals, politicians, the handicapped ... And we listen to them, don't we? Even if only to stop their incessant whining.
Now, naturally, we shouldn't expect all of these desillusioned, abused, bullied, repressed groups to use rhetorics to achieve their goal. We shouldn't expect all of these groups to fight for their cause with essays and books and debates. Not everyone can be Ghandi. Of course not. Some of these groups will use other ways of righting the wrongs. Knives. Bombs. AK-47's.
Charlie Hebdo gets a lot of support right now, but that used to be different. Even now, after the tragedy, an oikophobe like Sander has already called the magazine a racist publication. It is not. It is a satirical magazine that heckles all religions, politics, injustice. Many years ago, when Charlie Hebdo was experiencing its first clashes with muslims who interpret the Qu'ran as a war declaration, an ever growing group I should add, the liberal left chose the side of islam. Because political correctness demanded it. Here was a part of the West, an educated, intellectual part of it and a powerful part at that, who was so afraid of islam, so truly islamophobic, that it was willing to give into their demands. Yes, it was insensitive to draw cartoons about a military leader and self-proclaimed prophet. In less than 30 years the West had weakened. In the eighties Western intellectuals formed one solid block when Salman Rushdie was facing a fatwa calling for his assassination. No so anymore.
What we see today, all those people joining the "Je suis Charlie" movement, is Western hypocrisy in its purest form. Once the guys who did this are caught or killed, we will soon hear from the political correct again. Two murderers will become two desillusioned brothers, discriminated against from birth like all muslims are discriminated against constantly, incessantly in the free West, the big bully. Two brothers who had no other options in life - because the West who invested in them, offered them a home without wars, damaged them anyway, them and their people. And their religion which is more important than all other religions for it is the last, the definite word of God.
As always, the oikophobic part of the people will side with the "moderate" muslims who think it's really sad that people got killed and can't wait to say so on tv, but firmly believe that no one is entitled to draw Muhammed. Because Muhammed said so.
If political correctness is not corrected itself, it will eventually devastate the West. It is opening the gates to barbarians and asking us to not show any fear, not have any comments and definitely have no critique. It is asking us to accept things completely alien to our own culture and erase parts of our own, just to avoid problems and circumvent violence. It is turning us into Swiss cheese.
Keep this up and sooner or later we will have battlefields in Europe once again.
Last edited: