Massacre in Paris - Islamic Extremists Kill At least 12

[myk]

Technician quoted:
They should've known it would upset crazy fundamentalists” is the theological equivalent of “she shouldn't have worn such a short skirt.

And how is having a hot body the equivalent of belonging to the home culture of economic imperialism? It's more like being taunted sexually by a woman who is also torturing your friends. You don't need distorted analogies to dispute the "they had it coming" excuse for extreme violence. Guerrilla terrorism is if anything a tragedy, far from an omnipotent evil.

Phml said:
Charlie Hebdo was one of the last bastions of free speech in France.

To think the attack on an extremely liberal leftist publication is being used to promote the death penalty and will likely lead to more xenophobia. It's possibly a master stoke by whoever planned this. It is a huge insult on the dead.

And now the perpetrators are dead (and both brothers, not just one like in Boston), to make sure the incident can be reduced to simple ideas over more dead and silent protagonists.

What is dying here isn't freedom of expression, in fact you could say terrorism is the most extreme type of freedom of expression, and one man's freedom of expression may be another's muteness. What is bleeding (and hopefully not dead) is human dignity and democracy in Europe, ruined by its economic and international policy.

the_miano said:
I don't know why people keep labeling Islam as a "race" because it's not at all limited to just brown people. Islam is a religion.

That just happens in places with color race issues where the word racist becomes heavily charged and other related words don't convey the meaning as emotionally. Discrimination by religion, race, nationality and other cultural aspects are all xenophobia. Discrimination is more or less the same on all those levels and it's cultural because in our minds even races are mainly cultural constructs.

Marcaek said:
You'll likely not bother posting any evidence.

Hold your horses, motives are enough to start with. That they're "Islamic extremists" doesn't even preclude that what Hellbent said is true. The suspects were subjected to prison, so they could have been conditioned there. Western elites and Islamic fundamentalists often share enemies in liberal democratic institutions that get in the way of their plans. The do work together in some ways. If not, the US and Saudi Arabia wouldn't be such strong allies, for instance.

When such a sensitive attack occurs, one of the top priorities should be to bring the perpetrators alive to justice. Failing that is a deep blow against justice and memory, whether due to police incompetence or a political need to assuage reactionary blood-thirst.

[Technician]

myk said:

And how is having a hot body the equivalent of belonging to the home culture of economic imperialism? It's more like being taunted sexually by a woman who is also torturing your friends.

The fuck you talkin' about? Almost stopped reading there. That's some serious spasm, myk.

You don't need distorted analogies to dispute the "they had it coming" excuse for extreme violence. Guerrilla terrorism is if anything a tragedy, far from an omnipotent evil.

You know the analogy works but you insist on twisting in bullshit. The situations are the same. It describes two parties being violated for expressing themselves while third parties pushes the blame off the perpetrators and onto the victims. No distortion.

[myk]

Technician said:
It describes two parties being violated for expressing themselves while third parties pushes the blame off the perpetrators and onto the victims. No distortion.

In the case of Muslim radicals, the violation is a kind of retribution tied to violations against their culture and nations, and I doubt Charlie Hebdo cartoonists were naive about geopolitics. I don't see a parallel in women being sexy and getting attacked by sexist males. Perhaps there is one in a more misogynist mind...

Journalist: M. Ben M'Hidi, don't you think it's a bit cowardly to use women's baskets and handbags to carry explosive devices that kill so many innocent people?

Ben M'Hidi: And doesn't it seem to you even more cowardly to drop napalm bombs on defenseless villages, so that there are a thousand times more innocent victims? Of course, if we had your airplanes it would be a lot easier for us. Give us your bombers, and you can have our baskets.

[AkiraZXE]

That would almost work if the cartoonists were guilty of any sort of actual violence, the kind that they received, and that's already a moral grey area. I highly doubt they were. If they hadn't done anything wrong, they were innocent, obviously. If they were innocent and killed, they were victims. If they're still blamed afterwards, it's victim-blaming. It's that simple. Geopolitics is not relevant to whether or not they were innocent because they are not nations. They likely have little to no say individually on how things go in the borders of the country they live in, let alone what that country does to other countries.

"They're French", the justification left over when you boil away all the bullshit, does not excuse their deaths. When it's actually put simply, it's pretty disgusting.

[snapshot]

Nah .... Only thing i know is that there was many Insults to Muslims at this Newspaper .From what i can tell it's Charlie's Fault :P

[LANEGRACABRA]

Weren't these attackers already known radicals by the French intelligence? I wonder if these type of guys simply "disappear" in Russia on just a slight suspicion.

[WH-Wilou84]

LANEGRACABRA said:
Weren't these attackers already known radicals by the French intelligence?

Yes they were. As was Mohamed Merah, the guy responsible for two antisemitic shootings in 2012.

I think our intelligence services already prevented quite a few attacks without us knowing, but they simply don't have the resources and budget to monitor every single one of these guys. Besides, most of them are deemed as "not dangerous enough" before getting radicalized during their time in French prisons.

Charlie Hebdo is a couple blocks away from where I live. It's been a rough week here, at my office we just couldn't focus on anything else but these attacks as well as what followed.

DMGUYDZ64 said:
Only thing i know is that there was many Insults to Muslims at this Newspaper .From what i can tell it's Charlie's Fault :P

Sad thing is, many kids in French schools said the same thing, that it was all Charlie Hebdo's fault.

[Gez]

DMGUYDZ64 said:

Nah .... Only thing i know is that there was many Insults to Muslims at this Newspaper .From what i can tell it's Charlie's Fault :P

Charlie Hebdo never insulted Muslims.

It did insult terrorists, extremists, fundamentalists, and leaders (including religious leaders) who abuse their status and authority to make other people miserable. They insulted fascism, authoritarianism, and obscurantism.

Here's a good article for English-speaking people who may believe that Charlie Hebdo was racist:

http://junkee.com/the-problem-with-jesuischarlie/48456

[Kontra Kommando]

myk said:

In the case of Muslim radicals, the violation is a kind of retribution tied to violations against their culture and nations, and I doubt Charlie Hebdo cartoonists were naive about geopolitics. I don't see a parallel in women being sexy and getting attacked by sexist males. Perhaps there is one in a more misogynist mind...

I used the "rape" example to draw parallels, I also used the following as well:

Suppose a pro-gay newspaper was targeted and attacked by far-right extremists for publishing something that offended them. Would it be appropriate to say, "well, they should have thought about what they were doing".

[Maes]

Kontra Kommando said:

Suppose a pro-gay newspaper was targeted and attacked by far-right extremists for publishing something that offended them. Would it be appropriate to say, "well, they should have thought about what they were doing".

That's quite probably the opinion you would see shared by most "decent citizens", because the whole gay thing also causes strong biasing and knee-jerk reactions even in the most liberal Western societies.

But it depends. If this happened in Greece, since there's currently a political smearing campaign going on against Golden Dawn, targeting a (presumably leftist) pro-gay newspaper or group would generate at least 10 antifa festivals and 31 protest parades a month and no less than 147 official condemnation statements :-)

[Kontra Kommando]

Maes said:

That's quite probably the opinion you would see shared by most "decent citizens", because the whole gay thing also causes strong biasing and knee-jerk reactions even in the most liberal Western societies.

But it depends. If this happened in Greece, since there's currently a political smearing campaign going on against Golden Dawn, targeting a (presumably leftist) pro-gay newspaper or group would generate at least 10 antifa festivals and 31 protest parades a month and no less than 147 official condemnation statements :-)

Yep, and that's exactly my point. Obama has been a supporter for gay rights across the world, among other marginalized groups. He was actually the last person I would expect to say, that he questioned the judgement of magazine. He's supposed to be a champion of freedom. So I thought it was a rather cowardly and hypocritical thing for him to say.

EDIT: Just to clarify, what I am talking about is in reference to this:
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2015/01/07/white-house-questioned-judgment-of-french-magazine-attacked-by-terrorists-n1939747

If Charle Hebdo was located in the United States, they would probably still be alive today, and none of this would have ever happened. Why? Because the Obama administration would have had the company arrested, just like they did to the creators of, "The innocence of Muslims". He would have also blamed the magazine for some instance of unrest in the middle east, just like he blamed that movie for the Benghazi attacks. How about blaming their own failed and tenuous policies in the middle east, instead of scapegoating individuals? But if you're a mega corporation like Sony, and a movie you make inspires a nation state to declare it an act of war, its too high-profile to make a move apparently. I can't wait until this prick leaves office.

[Technician]

myk said:

In the case of Muslim radicals, the violation is a kind of retribution tied to violations against their culture and nations, and I doubt Charlie Hebdo cartoonists were naive about geopolitics. I don't see a parallel in women being sexy and getting attacked by sexist males. Perhaps there is one in a more misogynist mind...

Because both slutty cloths and social opinions are legal in France and there's no excuse if a fellow citizen can't accept that. It's not the victim's responsibility to not trigger a rapist or, in this case, a murderer for exercising their right. I'm sorry, but you're being willfully dense. You wanna know why that is, myk? Because we assume humans are not like animals and can think with a rational thought. Excusing these Muslim fanatics for doing something heinous is treating them not as equal citizens but as something less than how we think of ourselves. And holding them to a lesser standard is much more bigoted than anything "misogynistic" you can conjure up in your brain and project onto my post.

Also, Geopolitics? Really? Total non sequitur - there was no Benghazi-styled situation. And it's not our problem if Muslims get angry in the Middle East because we said something that's sacrilege in their nation. I'm not sacrificing alcohol because some Muslim doesn't like it over apartment 7-A and I'm especially not giving it up because there are entire nations demanding the world be dry on the other side of the planet. Get real.

[Maes]

Technician said:

Because both slutty cloths and social opinions are legal in France and there's no excuse if a fellow citizen can't accept that. It's not the victim's responsibility to not trigger a rapist or, in this case, a murderer for exercising their right.

There's always the sneaky counterargument "Having the freedom to say/do something doesn't mean that you should say/do it". What say you to that?

Also, ONLY IN GREECE: JIHAD HEAVY METAL

LYRICS (translated for your convenience):

I slayed the father
I slayed the mother
I slayed the brothers
five uncles and cousins

Now I'm on a rush
I will also slay a chicken
a spotted goat
and all the little bunnies

I am the Jihadist
I stab and slaughter everything
the Prophet gives me orders through the Shariah
and I am consumed by my own jerking off

I am lifting the jacket
I am stuffing the peach
I am whipping the dolphin
(note: there are euphemisms for gay sex, presumably topping, translated literally)
no christian will be left

I read the Qu'ran
from night to dawn
and then I slaughter everything
I am the Prophet's cock

I am the Jihadist
I stab and slaughter everything
to earn my place in heaven
my stupidity reaches to the abyss

I am the Jihadist
you won't find a biggest jerk than me

[dg93]

[myk]

Technician said:
You wanna know why that is, myk? Because we assume humans are not like animals and can think with a rational thought.

We're not in the eighteenth century, we're like in the twenty-first century and disciplines like psychology and psychiatry exist for a while now. We only assume that when they live in environments where that is really possible. The ability to reason in a civil, admirable and competent way is a form of wealth or capital that is damaged by histories of violence and neglect.

Excusing these Muslim fanatics for doing something heinous is treating them not as equal citizens but as something less than how we think of ourselves.

You're portraying them as inhuman or beneath us, you self-admitted bigot. You just said it, that they acted in an "inhuman manner". I think they're quite human, much like all of us except in a very different situation, so I can see their motivations, instead of just looking at their behavior from some normative angle made mainly for well-to-do Westerners. We're evidencing what human nature becomes in fucked up political and social situations, as well as the retarded neocon conceptions mass media promote and make you repeat to justify Western irresponsibility.

I said they had to be caught and judged, as a top priority. Excusing them is killing them in the street, handing them their martyrdom, helping veil the facts behind the incident and leaving its understanding in a stage where it will be usable politically for the leading media and political institutions of the West.

Also, Geopolitics? Really? Total non sequitur - there was no Benghazi-styled situation.

As implied by the video I posted above, guerrilla terror does not have immediate targets, those are hardly possible. It's a mode of violent political expression, not a tactical military strike. Unsurprisingly, it hit media which went viral worldwide at one point, also expression and part of what the affected in the Muslim world will see as a branch of what is attacking their wellbeing and (what may be left, in applicable cases, of their) sustaining values.

And it's not our problem if Muslims get angry in the Middle East because we said something that's sacrilege in their nation.

France isn't the Middle East yet, notwithstanding southern Europe is being treated almost as badly lately, give or take obvious differences. It is indeed our problem in any way or as long as we have any responsibility in helping them act in the ways we then ridicule.

In retrospect, had I the chance to say anything to the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists about their work, I could have said: "Guys, be careful. What you're doing is really dangerous and might be called foolish. While it may make more sense at home, you're ridiculing conceptions used by people throughout the world that are willing to kill themselves to lash out. They are that messed up. Many of their ideas are pernicious to human wellbeing or humane and democratic values, yet if treated lightly, you may get to evoke and know the violence that goes with the need to hold such values, especially when by the side, we Westerners sometimes finance their groups as long as they hurt some political faction we want destroyed, like the administrations of Saddam, Assad, Qaddafi, or the Islamic Republic, or when we support, arm and whitewash the acts of business-partner governments in nations like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar or Yemen, which back these radicals even more directly. You can't expect all the millions of Muslims subjected to Western interventionism and economic colonialism to make sensible sense of that mess. You will possibly die and your spouses and children will regret it. A joke is only a joke with the right codes and in an opportune environment. That is certainly lost when media makes humor go viral. The day you are martyred, political factions will vie to use your plight to radicalize positions and deepen the bigotry you mock and shun, but you won't be there to question that, and your fellow surviving workers will likely be too shocked to do it."

[mrthejoshmon]

Honestly I see them as subhuman. I see all murderers, rapists and slavers as subhuman scum (If the claims are proven true that is, proof is the judge of all).

I believe your human rights should be revoked the very moment you violate the human rights of others in an extreme manner (I.E Murdering them in cold blood). You violated their rights in a completely unwarranted manner so you should be equally violated as it is only fair that you be treated like you treated your victims, you can't just violate others rights and then expect yours to still be valid.

[dg93]

I don't understand why people keep coddling these violent nutjobs.

[Doomkid]

That post about Muslims only being happy in non-Muslim countries was pretty interesting and accurate, to my surprise. I'm usually the one tearing apart blanket statements, but I guess the angered racist in me is overpowering that for now. I know it isn't true across the board - I've met Muslims at work many times and they're often lovely people.

I guess it's nothing new though, people who come from cultures/countries that are ghetto asscracks love to "escape" them, which usually translates to "spreading their home's bullshit all around the world with them".

Anyway, humans are a bunch of dumb violent fucks. This atrocity was senseless. One thing to remember, religion is a consequence of human nature. If the insane fuckers weren't murdering innocent people over that, they'd be murdering innocent people over something else equally hairbrained. Don't lump every Muslim together, it isn't the right thing to do.

Hellbent said:

This was likely a false-flag "inside job" type of attack. The two accused are likely patsies.

Hellbent is the only sane one around here, all the evidence points toward this.




(lol @ anyone who took his post seriously, was clearly a joke)

[dg93]

Doomkid said:

Anyway, humans are a bunch of dumb violent fucks. This atrocity was senseless. One thing to remember, religion is a consequence of human nature. If the insane fuckers weren't murdering innocent people over that, they'd be murdering innocent people over something else equally hairbrained. Don't lump every Muslim together, it isn't the right thing to do.

Of course, I would never just say "All Muslims are radical and violent lunatics" because not all of them are like that. The same applies to people of other religious/or nonreligious faiths.

[Mithran Denizen]

mrthejoshmon said:

Honestly I see them as subhuman. I see all murderers, rapists and slavers as subhuman scum (If the claims are proven true that is, proof is the judge of all).

That's neither a rational response, nor a particularly useful way to consider the ethics of the situation.

I once read some material by Martha Nussbaum(iirc) which had an interesting analysis on this sort of emotional response. Basically this flavour of the 'disgust' emotion (especially directed to another person, e.g. seeing them as 'scum') psychologically plays out as a subconscious attempt to distance oneself from the aspects of one's own animal mortal nature which one finds discomforting.

Any time you think of someone as subhuman (or even simply 'gross'), you're transforming that person into a surrogate animal so that you feel justified in the self-deception that you are fundamentally superior and/or immaculate by comparison. People who murder, rape, and enslave (regardless of the reason) are completely human. Calling them less than that assumes that they do not have the capability to take responsibility for their own actions.

Human beings are capable of undertaking extremely harmful actions, not only willingly, but rationally, if their environment and the ideas in their heads come together in the wrong ways. The issue here isn't that the Charlie Hebdo attackers were less human than the rest of us, it's that they had a bunch of seriously mistaken beliefs stuck in their heads, that they were in an environment which provoked them to violence, and then, finally, that they made a conscious choice to enact that violence.

I empathize with the anger (and even the vengefulness, to some extent) of this sort of response, but the 'subhuman' reaction is one of those gut reactions that gets in the way of being a good person in the small scale, and gets in the way of social progress, in the large scale.

[Aliotroph?]

States that have a straightforward way to remove all of a person's rights will inevitably either screw up or abuse the power. Whatever the crime, paying it back with cruelty is a bad plan.

[dg93]

Aliotroph? said:

States that have a straightforward way to remove all of a person's rights will inevitably either screw up or abuse the power. Whatever the crime, paying it back with cruelty is a bad plan.

I agree

[myk]

mrthejoshmon said:
I believe your human rights should be revoked the very moment you violate the human rights of others in an extreme manner (I.E Murdering them in cold blood). You violated their rights in a completely unwarranted manner so you should be equally violated as it is only fair that you be treated like you treated your victims, you can't just violate others rights and then expect yours to still be valid.

Why not join the Islamic State? They pretty much share your idea and that's how they have the conviction to murder people they feel are committing unnameable acts against their culture or people.

Doomkid said:
I guess it's nothing new though, people who come from cultures/countries that are ghetto asscracks love to "escape" them, which usually translates to "spreading their home's bullshit all around the world with them".

It's just that toilets are shit magnets. Many perpetrators of crimes against humanity or economic policies that have ruined countries have fled to the US, since some of the economic and political allies that helped fund or coordinate them were there in the first place. Likewise, your country is the main promoter of the drug trade in the world due to its internal demand and its fallacious war on drugs policy, so you can expect many gangsters to be hanging out in poorer (lowly dealers) and richer (financiers and drug lords) neighborhoods.

The Islamic State initiative, for example, is led by Muslims who enriched themselves in the military and business campaigns against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, or the uprisings of the so-called Arab Spring in the last ten years or so, and that now want a piece of the pie there by building their own Islamic nation. They're a wedding of Western interventionism with Middle Eastern elites. Many were trained and recruited in Western countries, plus militants that joined them from the Middle East itself.

[Reisal]

3 of the gunmen have been killed in shootouts, 1 turned himself in and the accomplice driver is on the run. Good for French police!

[FireFish]

I am wondering about the continuation of this. The mass fear effects such actions attempt to achieve seem to be a severe miss in Europe, And because of a call to action by a Belgian reporter to make 1000 cartoons to hurt them has been reported to generate a huge amount of cartoons, it will have to show if those attacks are truly triggered by such content.

I would be seriously surprised if that reporter his booming career of traveling to dangerous middle east areas, and comparable countries might not get a bit rough after his attempt to hurt them.

Edit ;
The french police seems to be damn effective at what they do for being a part of a country where such things never happen(ed).

[june gloom]

The GIGN is one of the most highly-trained counter-terrorist forces in the world.

[Doomkid]

the_miano said:

Of course, I would never just say "All Muslims are radical and violent lunatics" because not all of them are like that. The same applies to people of other religious/or nonreligious faiths.

I just want you to know, that wasn't directed at you in particular, just a general statement.

myk said:

Many perpetrators of crimes against humanity or economic policies that have ruined countries have fled to the US, since some of the economic and political allies that helped fund or coordinate them were there in the first place. Likewise, your country is the main promoter of the drug trade in the world due to its internal demand and its fallacious war on drugs policy, so you can expect many gangsters to be hanging out in poorer (lowly dealers) and richer (financiers and drug lords) neighborhoods.

I live in Australia and am an Australian citizen. I know AUS has its head up the US's ass, but we're two different countries.

[Gez]

FireFish said:

The french police seems to be damn effective at what they do for being a part of a country where such things never happen(ed).

Haha.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Terrorism_in_France

[glenzinho]

Doomkid said:

I live in Australia and am an Australian citizen. I know AUS has its head up the US's ass, but we're two different countries.

Arent you an ex-pat from the U.S.?

[Doomkid]

I was born and raised in America, but I moved here 7 years ago. My dad's Australian, and I never really felt "at home" til I was here.