World Politics

[ScienceIsCool]

Amster please tell ME who my choice of Media is?

You guys go ahead and label whatever you please.

The jihadest would be doing this regardless and in the name of religion. Same goes for the fools who bomb abortion clinics in the name of Christianity. Serious fools. Yet in some way we are to submit to this and not say anything.

No, not submit. Not over-react either. Much better to become as informed as possible and enter an OODA loop in a determined manner.

One thing to consider is that these are actually rational actors who are using the political cartoons as a pre-text for using terrorism to further their actual agenda. One possible agenda would be to further the schism between Europeans and the Muslims living amongst them.

John Swanson

 

[Amsterhammer]

Amster please tell ME who my choice of Media is?

You guys go ahead and label whatever you please.

The jihadest would be doing this regardless and in the name of religion. Same goes for the fools who bomb abortion clinics in the name of Christianity. Serious fools. Yet in some way we are to submit to this and not say anything.

Glenn, you were perpetuating the false perception floated by some parts of US media, that 'Muslims aren't speaking out against what happened'. I made the point that nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

not scared brah. I still have my trigger finger.

And while I don't blame all Muslims - I do find it sad that the leaders of that religion do not come out in protest against these stone age jihad-ist who show up all the time.

#jesuisahmed

 

[del1962]

#jesuisahmed

hmmm

perhaps today of all days we in europe should be collectively saying

#jesuisjewish

 

[thirteen]

hmmm

perhaps today of all days we in europe should be collectively saying

#jesuisjewish

that would be #jesuisjuif

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

hmmm

perhaps today of all days we in europe should be collectively saying

#jesuisjewish

In case you didn't know, I did not invent that hashtag, Ahmed is the name of one of the police officers that died.

As in
Dyab Abou Jahjah
‏@Aboujahjah
I am not Charlie, I am Ahmed the dead cop. Charlie ridiculed my faith and culture and I died defending his right to do so. #JesuisAhmed

 

[thirteen]

In case you didn't know, I did not invent that hashtag, Ahmed is the name of one of the police officers that died.

As in
Dyab Abou Jahjah
‏@Aboujahjah
I am not Charlie, I am Ahmed the dead cop. Charlie ridiculed my faith and culture and I died defending his right to do so. #JesuisAhmed

i understood this -- and respect it… i think it may have been stated a little heavy-handed in that tweet (everyone carries their religious faiths to a different degree), but still respect.

 

[RetroActive]

Nafeez Ahmed: The Powers Behind The Islamic State
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAkqaRDOHhk

 

[blackcat]

I don't think it's the Christian Westerner given Obama a mandate, mostly because that block tends to vote republican and smugly today says "see, I told you so. Muslims are violent and irrecuperabe in terms of democracy." Personally, though I may merely be optimistic, or perhaps disingenuous, but I recognize myself in the conclusion that says the (majority of) "Muslims in Europe need to take on the responsibility for the jihadist question, and fight the monster side by side with us."

I don't know which of the positions is more realistic: the one that bets on the pacific majority, or those that expect the prepotency of the minority. But what I do know, without a doubt, is which is worth working on.

oh, i think you got my inference backwards. I see the original ambiguity.


I meant the Western Sydney jihadis, and the jihadis coming out of the European banlieues , to go and fight either Assad's alawite shia in Syria (against him), or for ISIL in Mesopotamia.

I did not mean Westerner or 3rd gen West muslim, going fighting side by side marines in Iraq or Afghanistan. I meant those from the banlieue going and detonating IED or doing suicide bombings across the levant. With emphasis on the "a cross".

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

I read quite a lot of analyses on why muslimterrorism is so omnipresent these days. Some put emphasis on the violent nature of Islam (BS, of course), in this forum I read a lot about western emperialism and 'authorised' violence against muslims in their home countries.

While the latter obviously is an important point, I think most analyses miss the crucial element: the growing (perceived) social and economic inequality (inherit to the capitalist world system), which leads to anomie with many. People in an 'anomic' state (not certain about the right English) by definition have nothing to loose, yet also have nothin to believe in (while it is the human nature to want to fit in somewhere).

There is a reason it seems so easy to convince youngsters in Europe to go fight in Syria, to go train in Yemen, ... And that reason is not the politics of the West in the Arab world (this merely is a trigger), nor the religion (this is the PR material).

If you want to solve a problem, fight the cause, not the symptoms.

 

[thirteen]

^ excellent post.

 

[Echoes]

Other racist tags on a mosque in Bayonne, last night: http://www.sudouest.fr/2015/01/09/c...iste-a-la-mosquee-de-bayonne-1791362-4018.php


Now, just some random thoughts.

Egypt 2013, more than 1,000 dead in different shootings. C.H. published this:

"Koran is sh*t. It does not stop bullets."

What would your reaction have been? "That's freedom of speech. We are entitled to laugh about everything, even the most horrible events. It's black humour. Laughing is better than crying after all."

Let's admit that yes, you can laugh about everything.

Last Wednesday, a French dissident cartoonist made an adaptation of it:

"Charlie Hebdo is sh*t. It does not stop bullets." (Charb is caricatured)

What is your reaction? "That's indecent, obscene. No respect for the dead. No respect for freedom of speech, for democracy. Poor people. I'm disgusted. May they rest in peace."


Hypocrites! Freedom of speech? Freedom for the speech of those who agree with you, yeah!

The lives of a thousand Egyptian Muslims is worth less than the lives of a dozen scatophile French.

This is why I say scatophile: http://www.staragora.com/images/flux/default/3/2/23007ef3b181e8ffb9f1129a87a621d54f0da07453f9d.jpg (I'm deliberately leaving it as link because it's too filthy/obscene). "Marine Le Pen, the candidate that looks like you."


Now on that TV show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amFNEDjslo4

A representative of the "official" French Islamic institution (UOIF) is a guest against two famous columnists: Franz-Ollivier Giesbert and Caroline Fourest (this @#$*|&@", known as the serial liar).

First question by the announcer: Would you take up the slogan "I am Charlie"?

Answer: sure!

Question by Giesbert: Shouldn't Muslims like you call for a demonstration against these rats? Will you demonstrate?

Answer: sure!

And then Fourest, the serial liar: But that's not enough. You can wait for a blood bath to occur to wake up. It's a constant struggle. Blasphemers are constantly under threat, etc etc etc


What a horrible display of left-wing arrogance! The guy is just very obedient to the establishment. He's surrendered twice and yet, that's not enough. Serves him right, though. He shouldn't have been so submissive, this "moderate" Muslim (there are no such things as moderate Muslims, you are Muslim or you are not, I have respect for real Muslims, I despise the "moderate" Muslims). Needless to say, my responses to both questions would have been no. The first question is just going all emotions and with emotions, you don't think.

The second question is humiliating and degrading for Muslims who are just commanded to go and demonstrate. If they want to demonstrate, it's on their own free will and not on order.

It's plain to see that Muslims are considered second-rate citizens in France. It's plain to see who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed. But some here would find it normal.

And then some little punks would think they are tough guys because they bash Muslims. I just wish they wouldn't use the term "political uncorrectness" to describe what it is that they do because it's plain to see that Islamophobia is the dominant ideology.

 

[hrotha]

I suppose your post would make sense if you ignore the MANY people who, on top of condemning the terrorist attack, have also said Charlie Hebdo is genuinely offensive, not funny, or that it pretty much perverts the true meaning of satire. See this for just one such example. You'd also have to ignore the MANY black comedy comics at the expense of Charlie Hebdo that have circulated these days and that have been taken as brilliant homages to the murdered cartoonists, such as this one.

I agree with your point on Islamophobia, though.

 

[rhubroma]

Other racist tags on a mosque in Bayonne, last night: http://www.sudouest.fr/2015/01/09/c...iste-a-la-mosquee-de-bayonne-1791362-4018.php


Now, just some random thoughts.

Egypt 2013, more than 1,000 dead in different shootings. C.H. published this:

"Koran is sh*t. It does not stop bullets."

What would your reaction have been? "That's freedom of speech. We are entitled to laugh about everything, even the most horrible events. It's black humour. Laughing is better than crying after all."

Let's admit that yes, you can laugh about everything.

Last Wednesday, a French dissident cartoonist made an adaptation of it:

"Charlie Hebdo is sh*t. It does not stop bullets." (Charb is caricatured)

What is your reaction? "That's indecent, obscene. No respect for the dead. No respect for freedom of speech, for democracy. Poor people. I'm disgusted. May they rest in peace."


Hypocrites! Freedom of speech? Freedom for the speech of those who agree with you, yeah!

The lives of a thousand Egyptian Muslims is worth less than the lives of a dozen scatophile French.

This is why I say scatophile: http://www.staragora.com/images/flux/default/3/2/23007ef3b181e8ffb9f1129a87a621d54f0da07453f9d.jpg (I'm deliberately leaving it as link because it's too filthy/obscene). "Marine Le Pen, the candidate that looks like you."


Now on that TV show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amFNEDjslo4

A representative of the "official" French Islamic institution (UOIF) is a guest against two famous columnists: Franz-Ollivier Giesbert and Caroline Fourest (this @#$*|&@", known as the serial liar).

First question by the announcer: Would you take up the slogan "I am Charlie"?

Answer: sure!

Question by Giesbert: Shouldn't Muslims like you call for a demonstration against these rats? Will you demonstrate?

Answer: sure!

And then Fourest, the serial liar: But that's not enough. You can wait for a blood bath to occur to wake up. It's a constant struggle. Blasphemers are constantly under threat, etc etc etc


What a horrible display of left-wing arrogance! The guy is just very obedient to the establishment. He's surrendered twice and yet, that's not enough. Serves him right, though. He shouldn't have been so submissive, this "moderate" Muslim (there are no such things as moderate Muslims, you are Muslim or you are not, I have respect for real Muslims, I despise the "moderate" Muslims). Needless to say, my responses to both questions would have been no. The first question is just going all emotions and with emotions, you don't think.

The second question is humiliating and degrading for Muslims who are just commanded to go and demonstrate. If they want to demonstrate, it's on their own free will and not on order.

It's plain to see that Muslims are considered second-rate citizens in France. It's plain to see who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed. But some here would find it normal.

And then some little punks would think they are tough guys because they bash Muslims. I just wish they wouldn't use the term "political uncorrectness" to describe what it is that they do because it's plain to see that Islamophobia is the dominant ideology.

Only religion can't stand being taken for a ride now and then. Of course this only demonstrates how fragile and insecure the religious really are and how totalitarian. Why should non-believers be beholden to the same reverence with which the religious worship their god? That the religous expect this from those outside their community of the faithful, is the only bastion of a pre-modern intolerant civilization that has been fortuitously left behind. Only a religious fanatic, today, would take so seriously what is plainly satire, as to become an assassin in the name of his god. What you defend is barbaric and sinister.

Here, take the Alexamenos graffito...who worships his god, Αλεξαμενος ϲεβετε θεον. ϲεβετε Second or third century in the paedagogeum for imperial page boys on the Palatine Hill, Rome. What satire!

 

[rhubroma]

I read quite a lot of analyses on why muslimterrorism is so omnipresent these days. Some put emphasis on the violent nature of Islam (BS, of course), in this forum I read a lot about western emperialism and 'authorised' violence against muslims in their home countries.

While the latter obviously is an important point, I think most analyses miss the crucial element: the growing (perceived) social and economic inequality (inherit to the capitalist world system), which leads to anomie with many. People in an 'anomic' state (not certain about the right English) by definition have nothing to loose, yet also have nothin to believe in (while it is the human nature to want to fit in somewhere).

There is a reason it seems so easy to convince youngsters in Europe to go fight in Syria, to go train in Yemen, ... And that reason is not the politics of the West in the Arab world (this merely is a trigger), nor the religion (this is the PR material).

If you want to solve a problem, fight the cause, not the symptoms.

Sure but you also have to consider the ghettoization of the ex-colonial quarters, now a generational problem, and the recrudesence of religious vocation that becomes inevitably radiclized because seen as the only (tribal) identity builder that gets pitted against the mainstream community, which has effectively marginalized them. This, not only because of the inability of capitalism to forge socio-economic bonds, but also that human capital lacking between the two groups, which religious identity has further exasperated.

Now I don't know how the human capital can be accumulated, though I'm certain that a dysfunctional capitalism will make what is already tremendously difficult, all the more arduous, if not impossible.

 

[frenchfry]

Other racist tags on a mosque in Bayonne, last night: http://www.sudouest.fr/2015/01/09/c...iste-a-la-mosquee-de-bayonne-1791362-4018.php


Now, just some random thoughts.

Egypt 2013, more than 1,000 dead in different shootings. C.H. published this:

"Koran is sh*t. It does not stop bullets."

What would your reaction have been? "That's freedom of speech. We are entitled to laugh about everything, even the most horrible events. It's black humour. Laughing is better than crying after all."

Let's admit that yes, you can laugh about everything.

Last Wednesday, a French dissident cartoonist made an adaptation of it:

"Charlie Hebdo is sh*t. It does not stop bullets." (Charb is caricatured)

What is your reaction? "That's indecent, obscene. No respect for the dead. No respect for freedom of speech, for democracy. Poor people. I'm disgusted. May they rest in peace."


Hypocrites! Freedom of speech? Freedom for the speech of those who agree with you, yeah!

The lives of a thousand Egyptian Muslims is worth less than the lives of a dozen scatophile French.

This is why I say scatophile: http://www.staragora.com/images/flux/default/3/2/23007ef3b181e8ffb9f1129a87a621d54f0da07453f9d.jpg (I'm deliberately leaving it as link because it's too filthy/obscene). "Marine Le Pen, the candidate that looks like you."


Now on that TV show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amFNEDjslo4

A representative of the "official" French Islamic institution (UOIF) is a guest against two famous columnists: Franz-Ollivier Giesbert and Caroline Fourest (this @#$*|&@", known as the serial liar).

First question by the announcer: Would you take up the slogan "I am Charlie"?

Answer: sure!

Question by Giesbert: Shouldn't Muslims like you call for a demonstration against these rats? Will you demonstrate?

Answer: sure!

And then Fourest, the serial liar: But that's not enough. You can wait for a blood bath to occur to wake up. It's a constant struggle. Blasphemers are constantly under threat, etc etc etc


What a horrible display of left-wing arrogance! The guy is just very obedient to the establishment. He's surrendered twice and yet, that's not enough. Serves him right, though. He shouldn't have been so submissive, this "moderate" Muslim (there are no such things as moderate Muslims, you are Muslim or you are not, I have respect for real Muslims, I despise the "moderate" Muslims). Needless to say, my responses to both questions would have been no. The first question is just going all emotions and with emotions, you don't think.

The second question is humiliating and degrading for Muslims who are just commanded to go and demonstrate. If they want to demonstrate, it's on their own free will and not on order.

It's plain to see that Muslims are considered second-rate citizens in France. It's plain to see who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed. But some here would find it normal.

And then some little punks would think they are tough guys because they bash Muslims. I just wish they wouldn't use the term "political uncorrectness" to describe what it is that they do because it's plain to see that Islamophobia is the dominant ideology.

Feel good to get all that hate out of your system? I am sure there is much more where that came from.

First of all, there is very little islamophobie happening. It is completely disingenuous to take an isolated example and make generalisations to fit your rant. It is only reasonable to discuss the context in which the past few days events happened, and Islamic fundamentalism is one of the significant factors. Lots of people are attempting to take advantage of the events, from politicians (especially politicians) to the press to punks looking for a thrill.

Second of all, the "Charlie Hebdo c'est de la merde" satire could well have been done by one of the surviving staffers. They have maintained their irreverent stance despite the tragedy, and in interviews have consistently used their own style of humor (whether you appreciate the style or not) in referring to the assassination of their colleagues and friends. I am not personally a fan of Charlie Hebdo, but you have to give them credit for being consistent.

As I have said in a previous post, my impression of "official" Muslim leaders is that they are political hacks dependent on government financing so virtually toothless (we appear to agree somewhat on this point). That they are pushed into a corner isn't such a bad thing.

 

[del1962]

Apparently Synagogues in Paris where closed on their Sabbath for the first time since the Nazi Occupation

I read that Jews don't feel safe in France anymore and many are leaving or looking to get out, plenty of whom are coming to the UK, this is very sad for France and I don't blame the French (including French Muslims) but anti-Semitism from extreme groups whether right wing, left wing or religious is making their lives very difficult.

 

[blutto]

....well, as long as we are trying to deal with the idea of edgy satire what does youse think of the following....and do youse think CH would have published it?....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hot off the nonpress: The Khazarian Sex Predator Gene May Soon Be Found


January 06, 2015 / Gilad Atzmon

A Fictional News Item by Gilad Atzmon

Professor Yehuda Kosher from Be’er Chosen University, Israel, announced today that he and his team may be close to uncovering the JNA (Jewish DNA) and may be able to isolate the Khazarian Sex Predator (KSP) gene.

Professor Kosher, Israel’s leading evolutionary psychoarcheologist and a renown advocate of applied Eugenics told The Jewish Scientific Daily (JSD) that the apparent physical resemblance between Woody Alan and Alan Dershowitz’s facial features gives new hope for a scientific break through. Said Kosher in reference to allegations against Alan Dershowitz, “we may be able, for the first time, to isolate the KSP gene, and later, hopefully, to eliminate it from the genus of our people.

Professor Kosher assured the JSD that he and his team have managed to construct computer simulations that prove an overwhelming facial resemblance between the two New York Jewish celebrities. The Israeli scientist expressed the hope that former Professor Dershowitz could be enticed to agree to an examination by Kosher and his Israeli team. Any resulting scientific procedures may help to ensure the safety of American female minors (gentile).

When asked by the Jewish Magazine why he didn’t heed the call made today by Rabbi Shmuley for Jews to lend their support to Dershowitz regardless of his alleged misconduct, Professor Kosher replied angrily, “I am a Zionist, a true devoted Zionist, in accordance with the spirit of our forefathers, Herzl, Jabotinsky, Weizmann and Nordau. I believe that Zionism’s primary mission was to develop a new Jew who would more closely resemble an ethical and civilized human being. Tracing our most problematic genes from biblical times to the present has been my life’s work. As a Zionist and a near academic, Dershowitz should support our effort and allow me and my team to examine his brain, measure his skull and decode his genetic makeup so that we can compare it to Woody’s Jeffrey Epstein, Roman Polanski and other ethically troubled characters both Jews and gentile. If Dershowitz is to be a true Zionist like me, he must support our effort to make the Jews look better.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cheers

 

[thirteen]

i'd rather cartoons ^

 

[ray j willings]

i'd rather cartoons ^

I'd rather Chris Morris ...he gets it spot on every time.

 

[del1962]

i'd rather cartoons ^

I'd rather blutto didn't post such racist material and that the mods would take action against it.

 

[BigMac]

I'd rather blutto didn't post such racist material and that the mods would take action against it.

What the actual.

 

[RetroActive]

I'd rather blutto didn't post such racist material and that the mods would take action against it.

So we can skewer Islam, both literally and figuratively, repeatedly and without restraint. We can also skewer Christianity and any other belief be it religious or secular (sort of, maybe) but Judaism, Khazars, and most topically relevant the Talmud are out of bounds. Interesting but hardly surprising - boring in fact, as the facts aren't in order at all.

How the Talmud has any legitimacy at all these days is beyond belief. If any book (that I've ever read) needs to held out in the full light light of day and sanitized the Talmud qualifies par excellence. That **** needs to be flushed.

 

[rhubroma]

So we can skewer Islam, both literally and figuratively, repeatedly and without restraint. We can also skewer Christianity and any other belief be it religious or secular (sort of, maybe) but Judaism, Khazars, and most topically relevant the Talmud are out of bounds. Interesting but hardly surprising - boring in fact, as the facts aren't in order at all.

How the Talmud has any legitimacy at all these days is beyond belief. If any book (that I've ever read) needs to held out in the full light light of day and sanitized the Talmud qualifies par excellence. That **** needs to be flushed.

I once had to take an orthodox Jewish family from New York to Ostia Antica to primarily show them the ancient synagogue. The woman was insupportably arrogant, an "intellectual" that teaches at a Jewish university of the Big Apple. When I asked her about her religious views, she said point blank: "the Jews are God's chosen people and come before all other societies in His eyes. For this reason, because we are so special, we have been persecuted by the haughty and the envious down through the ages. It is our right to reclaim Israel and this is coming about."

I was, needless to say, offended by her remarks, not being Jewish, or of any faith for that matter, who thus doesn't feel particularly special, nor particularly inferior to anyone or group, being as I am part of the human race along with about another 7 billion people. Of course I said nothing sure as I was in the knowledge that anything I could have responded with would have been taken as "an offense to her religion," and thus "anti-semitic." I thus auto-censored my own right to free speech in deference to hers, which of course she placed no limit on regarding her own, however inane, or offensive it appeared to me. I would like to have said, however, that her attitude and views certainly won't further her cause among the rest of the non-elect, but I kept my sarcasm in check. Of course her fanaticism, the same type of religious fascism expressed in Blutto's satirical post, is the thorny issue, not Judaism or the Jews per say. And this is the type of Judaism and Jew that was among the just targets of Charlie Hebdo, a satire that in our society is necessary, because cathartic (there is no better therapy than to laugh at the absurd and terrifying), apart from being within one's civic rights: all the more so because another target has recently come with a horrific death sentence.

Je suis Charlie.

 

[del1962]

So we can skewer Islam, both literally and figuratively, repeatedly and without restraint. We can also skewer Christianity and any other belief be it religious or secular (sort of, maybe) but Judaism, Khazars, and most topically relevant the Talmud are out of bounds. Interesting but hardly surprising - boring in fact, as the facts aren't in order at all.

How the Talmud has any legitimacy at all these days is beyond belief. If any book (that I've ever read) needs to held out in the full light light of day and sanitized the Talmud qualifies par excellence. That **** needs to be flushed.

Lets replace Jewish in Blutto's racist filth with Black man or Arab and change the famous Jewish people with black people or Arabs who have committed sexual offenses and see how it reads

It seems that as in europe of old antisemitism is the acceptable face of racism around here, i am sorry that you are unable to understand that.