|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jan 10, 2015 10:47:02 GMT -5
I read and re-read this thread a dozen times and I have no words to express the loss of the cartoonists that was murdered by terrorists period. It's so sad that we live in a fragile world of which lives can be lost in a heartbeat and having said that - I find it difficult to express my anger to the terrorists that snuff the lives of three innocents human being in an act so hideous it's difficult to gauge my anger towards them. I want peace so bad - but mankind finds ways to suppress it and that's makes it harder for life to go forward in harmony. Sorry about the ramblings here - and that's how I feel about it. Well said, MC. How can humans go down that road, really? I get that sometimes life gives us such a raw deal that we feel nothing but pain and anger. But when that happens, what prompts us to decide to just go out in a blaze of hatred and violence, instead of just walking away? Is our animal side so strong that lashing out is the default reaction to slights, both real and perceived? And isn't it doubly shameful when we lash out violently in the name of a religion or a philosophy that's supposed to make us better than our animal side? Criminy, I've never seen a dog biting someone because of an idea. How can a human being be less civilized? The three murderers had it rough in life. So have a large number of citizens who turned out all right. I wish that those who would imitate them will come to understand that when push comes to shove, we are responsible for the choices we make. When we decide to go out and kill people, it is not because of a divine mandate or because it is our destiny; it is because we want to do it. One of the killers spoke to a reporter before the end, and disingenuously claimed that he was not a killer because the victims "had insulted the prophet". Well, d-uh, yes, he was a killer. One who willfully chose to kill another human being because of a cartoon. I almost wish I believed in God so I could take solace in imagining that bozo facing his creator, and realizing how deeply wrong, foolish and evil his acts were. On a brighter note, here's an admirable thought about the tragedy, one that the victims would doubtless agree with. It was drawn by Bado, a caricaturist from Canada. Paraphrasing something written in Charlie Hebdo a few years ago, it has the murdered cartoonists saying "we wouldn't want to be avenged by morons". An invitation not to let the terrorists push us into hatred and intolerance.  |
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jan 11, 2015 10:51:28 GMT -5
I think it's fear and/or a misguided (at least in solid proof) notion that our existence is any different than an animal. We all don't want to think that we may completely cease to exist upon death. And that time will go on and on and on even long after our species is extinct. That's a sobering thought for a species who has a different notion planted in their brains from infancy. If there is something after death only the dead know 100%. And even if truly believe in a god that will look after us if we do what he asks there's still that human part the fears our own end. I think that's what allows people to become either hate filled and violent, letting that fear control them and dictate their actions, so they avoid eternal demise, or peacefully spread what they believe will save others from eternal demise and save themselves from it in the process. I was part of the latter at one time in my life and when for me personally the realization came that it was as a shame. Just another Christian sect started by somebody who got enough people to listen, I then thought about death. I then I thought if one religions a scam then maybe they all are. Then maybe there is no heaven or paradise or resurrection and may nothing but the eternal void after death. That's scarey and very humbling of our place in the universe.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jan 11, 2015 11:19:42 GMT -5
My computer just ate the comments I has about Joe Sacco's totally misguided piece in the Guardian.Yes, that's right, Joe. Blame the victims, suggest that they're in the pocket of some Jewish lobby, completely miss the point about what satire is, and conveniently forget that Charlie Hebdo attacked racism and islamophobes far more often than it did radical Islam. Good work. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jan 12, 2015 10:02:14 GMT -5
My computer just ate the comments I has about Joe Sacco's totally misguided piece in the Guardian.Yes, that's right, Joe. Blame the victims, suggest that they're in the pocket of some Jewish lobby, completely miss the point about what satire is, and conveniently forget that Charlie Hebdo attacked racism and islamophobes far more often than it did radical Islam. Good work. Thanks for the link. It was probably inevitable that someone was going to say they brought it on themselves. That it was a fellow cartoonist makes just that little bit more reprehensible. So nutjobs with guns are the ones who decide what is appropriate to publish? Cartoonists should live in fear for their lives of offending anyone? Plenty of people of various religions, including Muslims, deal with their religion being mocked and degraded every day. Yet they manage to get past it without killing people. And from what I understand, these cartoons weren't even mocking their prophet or religion, just the violent extremists. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jan 12, 2015 10:18:48 GMT -5
I read and re-read this thread a dozen times and I have no words to express the loss of the cartoonists that was murdered by terrorists period. It's so sad that we live in a fragile world of which lives can be lost in a heartbeat and having said that - I find it difficult to express my anger to the terrorists that snuff the lives of three innocents human being in an act so hideous it's difficult to gauge my anger towards them. I want peace so bad - but mankind finds ways to suppress it and that's makes it harder for life to go forward in harmony. Sorry about the ramblings here - and that's how I feel about it. Well said, MC. How can humans go down that road, really? I get that sometimes life gives us such a raw deal that we feel nothing but pain and anger. But when that happens, what prompts us to decide to just go out in a blaze of hatred and violence, instead of just walking away? Is our animal side so strong that lashing out is the default reaction to slights, both real and perceived? And isn't it doubly shameful when we lash out violently in the name of a religion or a philosophy that's supposed to make us better than our animal side? Criminy, I've never seen a dog biting someone because of an idea. How can a human being be less civilized? The three murderers had it rough in life. So have a large number of citizens who turned out all right. I wish that those who would imitate them will come to understand that when push comes to shove, we are responsible for the choices we make. When we decide to go out and kill people, it is not because of a divine mandate or because it is our destiny; it is because we want to do it. One of the killers spoke to a reporter before the end, and disingenuously claimed that he was not a killer because the victims "had insulted the prophet". Well, d-uh, yes, he was a killer. One who willfully chose to kill another human being because of a cartoon. I almost wish I believed in God so I could take solace in imagining that bozo facing his creator, and realizing how deeply wrong, foolish and evil his acts were.On a brighter note, here's an admirable thought about the tragedy, one that the victims would doubtless agree with. It was drawn by Bado, a caricaturist from Canada. Paraphrasing something written in Charlie Hebdo a few years ago, it has the murdered cartoonists saying "we wouldn't want to be avenged by morons". An invitation not to let the terrorists push us into hatred and intolerance. I bolded the part I wanted to speak to. As a believer, I can say there is some, small, grim satisfaction in envisioning the revelation these murderers faced in the hereafter. Whether who they faced is called God, Allah, or some other name, I suspect they aren't going to get the martyr rewards they expected to get. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2015 11:29:33 GMT -5
Horrible tragedy. I fear this may be another violent year in terrorism, as sleeper cells around the world have been activated. As much as I abhor hacking groups such as Anonymous, I do like how they have declared to wipe out terrorist websites and social media accounts. Using their "talents" to help rid the world of this kind of evil is something I can get behind.  |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456 
|
Post by ironchimp on Jan 12, 2015 11:38:48 GMT -5
I must admit i have little sympathy with the cartoonists - everyone knows what happens over last few years when you do that - they did it and did it with their eyes 100% open and got innocent people killed because of it. Well done guys.
100 years ago france invades huge swathes of muslim africa (while the british take the rest of the muslim world) then proceed to murder, torture and brutalise the populations
france loses its country and gets its african subjects to help win it back for them and promptly con them as soon as they have it back
they then launch death squad militias in algeria
they then ship in those same people to scrub their toilets for them
they then treat them like garbage in a racist society
and are then shocked that this somehow ended up in race riots
all the while treating their homelands like puppets of france bankrolling all sorts of vicious dictators and crippling democracies, freedom of speech, human rights etc
and then just add the final touch, mock their faith.
and then are shocked when people turn militant after 100 years of being utterly brutalised by them (and its england too, not just france)
|
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jan 12, 2015 11:46:56 GMT -5
I must admit i have little sympathy with the cartoonists - everyone knows what happens over last few years when you do that - they did it and did it with their eyes 100% open and got innocent people killed because of it. Well done guys. 100 years ago france invades huge swathes of muslim africa (while the british take the rest of the muslim world) then proceed to murder, torture and brutalise the populations france loses its country and gets its african subjects to help win it back for them and promptly con them as soon as they have it back they then launch death squad militias in algeria they then ship in those same people to scrub their toilets for them they then treat them like garbage in a racist society and are then shocked that this somehow ended up in race riots all the while treating their homelands like puppets of france bankrolling all sorts of vicious dictators and crippling democracies, freedom of speech, human rights etc and then just add the final touch, mock their faith. and then are shocked when people turn militant after 100 years of being utterly brutalised by them (and its england too, not just france) They were killed over drawings. Nothing justifies that. If, as a people, they have legitimate issues then there are peaceful ways of causing change. This gains them nothing. |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456
|
Post by ironchimp on Jan 12, 2015 12:02:11 GMT -5
i'm not saying it's right - i'm saying everyone knows what happens when you do that over the last 15 years or so (remember south park did all of this maye 15 years ago - no problem at all)
and no for some people there arent peaceful ways of change - because the game is too fixed and they have absolutely nothing left to lose.
No offense but from memory i think you said you were in the navy (and i apologise unreservedly if i am wrong) ... were those guns justified?
|
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jan 12, 2015 12:17:32 GMT -5
i'm not saying it's right - i'm saying everyone knows what happens when you do that over the last 15 years or so (remember south park did all of this maye 15 years ago - no problem at all) and no for some people there arent peaceful ways of change - because the game is too fixed and they have absolutely nothing left to lose. No offense but from memory i think you said you were in the navy (and i apologise unreservedly if i am wrong) ... were those guns justified? To address your points: No, you didn't say it was right, but blaming the victims (they should have known better, they asked for it) isn't right either whether it's blaming a rape victim or a murder victim. I don't accept that there is no peaceful avenue for change. Is the deck more stacked against them than it was in the civil rights fight in the US? Dr. King advocated peaceful change, not ideological assassins. Yes, I was in the Navy. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking. Does the Navy and military in general have and use guns? Yes. Do they shoot people expressing opinions they don't agree with? No. A military, acting on orders from their government, is a far cry from cowards who shoot unarmed civilians. |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456
|
Post by ironchimp on Jan 12, 2015 12:36:13 GMT -5
i'm not saying it's right - i'm saying everyone knows what happens when you do that over the last 15 years or so (remember south park did all of this maye 15 years ago - no problem at all) and no for some people there arent peaceful ways of change - because the game is too fixed and they have absolutely nothing left to lose. No offense but from memory i think you said you were in the navy (and i apologise unreservedly if i am wrong) ... were those guns justified? To address your points: No, you didn't say it was right, but blaming the victims (they should have known better, they asked for it) isn't right either whether it's blaming a rape victim or a murder victim. I don't accept that there is no peaceful avenue for change. Is the deck more stacked against them than it was in the civil rights fight in the US? Dr. King advocated peaceful change, not ideological assassins. Yes, I was in the Navy. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking. Does the Navy and military in general have and use guns? Yes. Do they shoot people expressing opinions they don't agree with? No. A military, acting on orders from their government, is a far cry from cowards who shoot unarmed civilians. Yes the decked is more stacked in a way because they had supporters and sympathisers with their cause in the US and across the globe. No one cares two cents about West Africa. (I'm assuming with the name coulibaly in one of the incidents that he was francophone west african). The cartoonists have to take the blame because they knew what would happen - there is no ambiguity here in Europe on this issue - do this and this will be the repercussion. If you wish to take the repercussion and martyr yourself for free speech then respect. If by doing it you are endangering the lives of others who have not made that choice of their own free will then ... Ah i see so you can fire your gun at whoever the government tells you and thats fine, but everyone else has to find a peaceful solution to their conflicts. And of course no civilians are ever killed when you fire a gun. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jan 12, 2015 12:59:45 GMT -5
To address your points: No, you didn't say it was right, but blaming the victims (they should have known better, they asked for it) isn't right either whether it's blaming a rape victim or a murder victim. I don't accept that there is no peaceful avenue for change. Is the deck more stacked against them than it was in the civil rights fight in the US? Dr. King advocated peaceful change, not ideological assassins. Yes, I was in the Navy. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking. Does the Navy and military in general have and use guns? Yes. Do they shoot people expressing opinions they don't agree with? No. A military, acting on orders from their government, is a far cry from cowards who shoot unarmed civilians. Yes the decked is more stacked in a way because they had supporters and sympathisers with their cause in the US and across the globe. No one cares two cents about West Africa. (I'm assuming with the name coulibaly in one of the incidents that he was francophone west african). The cartoonists have to take the blame because they knew what would happen - there is no ambiguity here in Europe on this issue - do this and this will be the repercussion. If you wish to take the repercussion and martyr yourself for free speech then respect. If by doing it you are endangering the lives of others who have not made that choice of their own free will then ... Ah i see so you can fire your gun at whoever the government tells you and thats fine, but everyone else has to find a peaceful solution to their conflicts. And of course no civilians are ever killed when you fire a gun. Points, again in order: Maybe the civil rights movement had more support because they didn't murder unarmed civilians? Cartoonists have to take the blame: Just like rape victims have to take the blame for what they were wearing or their past sexual encounters? Were they asking for it? Were civil rights activists asking to be lynched because they knew that it could happen if they spoke out? If everyone bows to the will of assassins, then the assassins are dictating what we can and can't say. Today it's cartoons depicting their prophet. Tomorrow, what's next? Your last point: If you can't see the difference between a military following government orders (usually only employed after the peaceful solutions have failed), subject to rules of engagement designed to avoid civilian casualties, and cowards acting on their own, gunning down unarmed civilians for drawings the killers don't agree with, then I don't think we have much common ground for discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jan 12, 2015 13:04:55 GMT -5
Horrible tragedy. I fear this may be another violent year in terrorism, as sleeper cells around the world have been activated. As much as I abhor hacking groups such as Anonymous, I do like how they have declared to wipe out terrorist websites and social media accounts. Using their "talents" to help rid the world of this kind of evil is something I can get behind. That is awesome. |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456
|
Post by ironchimp on Jan 12, 2015 13:22:50 GMT -5
Yes the decked is more stacked in a way because they had supporters and sympathisers with their cause in the US and across the globe. No one cares two cents about West Africa. (I'm assuming with the name coulibaly in one of the incidents that he was francophone west african). The cartoonists have to take the blame because they knew what would happen - there is no ambiguity here in Europe on this issue - do this and this will be the repercussion. If you wish to take the repercussion and martyr yourself for free speech then respect. If by doing it you are endangering the lives of others who have not made that choice of their own free will then ... Ah i see so you can fire your gun at whoever the government tells you and thats fine, but everyone else has to find a peaceful solution to their conflicts. And of course no civilians are ever killed when you fire a gun. Points, again in order: Maybe the civil rights movement had more support because they didn't murder unarmed civilians? Cartoonists have to take the blame: Just like rape victims have to take the blame for what they were wearing or their past sexual encounters? Were they asking for it? Were civil rights activists asking to be lynched because they knew that it could happen if they spoke out? If everyone bows to the will of assassins, then the assassins are dictating what we can and can't say. Today it's cartoons depicting their prophet. Tomorrow, what's next? Your last point: If you can't see the difference between a military following government orders (usually only employed after the peaceful solutions have failed), subject to rules of engagement designed to avoid civilian casualties, and cowards acting on their own, gunning down unarmed civilians for drawings the killers don't agree with, then I don't think we have much common ground for discussion. These are people with 100 years of brutality against them and no world attention at all - surprise surprise some people have gone full on radical (as they did in the civil rights movement which spanned the whole spectrum of beliefs from peaceful protest to full armed rebellion and a separate state) And no the rapa analogy doesnt work because 100,00s of women every day wear whatever clothes they chose and nothing happens. Everytime one satirises islam in the last 15 years in europe its a cast iron certainty they will be attacked. So if you want to do it, by all means, but do it in a location where others wont get hurt. Having been in London during Ira bombings (thanks US for funding that by the way), the Nail bombings, and the Kurdish self immolation protests (thanks US and UK for promising air support and then backing out of it leaving them to be butchered - a scandal which of course we were all utterly outraged by.. or didnt care less about ). So I know full well what it's like when people want to fight and make statements in a densely packed urban environment - it sucks hard. And no you are right - the military has never killed, murdered, raped, tortured innocent people. absolutely never happened. All i can say is go and look at a US backed military regime in West Africa - then see all the people the president of that country has killed - trade union leaders, newspaper reporters, civil rights campaigners, democracy campaigners, students union presidents. Then see how you walk around as a white person with total immunity in the country, then go and see the presidents US funded palace, his sports cars- the go to his village and check that out, then go to a normal village and check that out. Then it might make more sense why some youth have turned so militant.Don't ask why there is no Martin Luther King tho - because he's been shot in the head by guns paid for by the US. google norbert Zongo if you want to see who a Martin Luther King was in that country. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jan 12, 2015 13:26:43 GMT -5
My computer just ate the comments I has about Joe Sacco's totally misguided piece in the Guardian.Yes, that's right, Joe. Blame the victims, suggest that they're in the pocket of some Jewish lobby, completely miss the point about what satire is, and conveniently forget that Charlie Hebdo attacked racism and islamophobes far more often than it did radical Islam. Good work. While I agree that this was not be the time for this particular cartoon, I do think the message is one to think about; that simply saying, "There's something seriously wrong with these people..." isn't an adequate answer to the problem. I don't think the answer is to limit satire as he seems to suggest, but I do think that there does have to be a much larger discussion about how the cultures of the East and the West can coexist that goes beyond, "We're right and they're wrong" which is often seen as the default position. So yeah, stupid strip but I think it does contain something worth discussing. |
|
