French mag Charlie Hebdo attacked by gunmen, 12 dead

[Adieu]

Overreact much Mister E? Explain to me the difference between a muslim community desiring to live under sharia law and a mormon compound, or some seventh day adventist community? You're trying to portray islam as the exception here. As if there are right and wrong theological doctrines.

[MisterE]

@stephen- what you just said there kind of IS my point. the rare violent extremists who actually go shoot someone or blow something up aren't the only issue. it's not just a black and white, 'binary' issue of, 'violent extremists' vs 'peaceful good guy muslims'. and i'm only saying that because i think it's totally dishonest as all hell for people to jump to calling someone a xenophobe for pointing out something like what you just gave as an example there. that immigrants should adapt to the place they are going, instead of expecting that place to adapt to them. but for years there has been a decent chance that just saying that will get you labeled a xenophobe or a bigot. and some of these valid complaints people have are getting lumped in with any and all opposition to immigrants, under this big heading of bigotry.

 

@adeiu- the issue is that according to those sources and others which you can find with some searching, there are groups who expect that they should be able to enforce or push their law onto others. and this is why i was asking about who or what Aboutaleb was referring to when he said that muslims need to adapt to their new homes, in my first post.

 

@chen- yeah the specific claim that a group is demanding sharia law be enforced officially (and i've even seen claims that they're demanding their neighborhood be made into a separate islamic state), may be bogus. i can't find a credible source on that specific claim. i can't claim to know exactly what's going on over there, if anything, but i think those 2 sources i linked last time seem not crazy biased and seem to me to indicate that something is going on and that some people perceive (maybe justly?) issues. the Aftenposten has a few other articles clearly defending the muslim community in norway so its no stormfront. yet in that article it says (translated by google):

An unknown number of thousands

The extreme who are willing to commit violence are few. Those working intensely to overthrow society ideologically, are many. In Norway, an unknown number of thousands, which in all probability increase. How can I claim it? Including by checking the ideology of central mosques, mosques also the violent elements frequent, and ties between individuals and groups.

For example Islamic Cultural Centre (ICC), with 3,500 members, where Arfan Bhatti is observed in prayer . ICC is a branch of the movement Jamaat-i-Islami in Pakistan which is considered extreme. Jamaat-i-Islami was founded by one of the previous century's foremost Sunni Islamists, Maulana Maududi , the man who got his dream fulfilled when the Pakistani law were Islamized and including the barbaric blasphemy law saw the light. Then we have Tawfiiq Islamic Centre with 5400 members, with origins in the Somali population. It has been expressed broad support for the violent Salafists Al-Shabab.

[chenGOD]

I don't suppose you happened to check the date on that article did you? No?

 

"Updated:

16.nov. 2012"

 

You would think if there were serious efforts to take over a part of Oslo ongoing since 2012, that there might have been a bit more coverage about it somewhere besides white supremacist websites rehashing the same article over and over again.

[d-a-m-o]

january 6 : no one cares about charlie hebdo

 

january 14 : everyone is buying it

 

 

french peoples are such sheep

[goDel]

january 6 : no one cares about charlie hebdo, except for some extremists

 

january 14 : everyone is buying it, to show the extremists they're doing something wrong

 

:hurrah:

 

french peoples are such heros when it comes to protecting their freedom

Fixt

[triachus]

january 6 : no one cares about charlie hebdo

 

january 14 : everyone is buying it

 

 

french peoples are such sheep

 

good thing some super individual unsheepable french people keep their arrogance going no matter what

[psn]

 

 

The one about Muslims calling for sharia law is from 2012 (might be older but that's as far back as I've found in my brief googling), it gets spewed forth on all these stormfront type sites, and is not backed up by anything with a basis in reality (ie Gronland is not controlled by Sharia Law).

 

I walk through Grønland pretty much every day. It is not a sharia state within the city.

[MisterE]

I don't suppose you happened to check the date on that article did you? No?

 

"Updated:

16.nov. 2012"

 

You would think if there were serious efforts to take over a part of Oslo ongoing since 2012, that there might have been a bit more coverage about it somewhere besides white supremacist websites rehashing the same article over and over again.

well i admitted in the post that i couldn't find anything mainstream (although i have now) and the sources seemed maybe questionable, but i don't think its really honest to say it's only white supremacist websites that talked about it either (and by the way, yeah i had noticed the date).

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vg.no%2Fnyheter%2Finnenriks%2Fterrortrussel-mot-norge%2Fetterforsker-trusler-om-terror-fra-norsk-islamistgruppe%2Fa%2F10067780%2F&edit-text=&act=url

 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/24/world/europe/norway-terror-threat/

 

so there the reporting is that the demands were matched with an actual terror threat which would classify the guys as 'actual terrorists', which kind of gets away from the point i was trying to make. but the other two articles i linked were talking more about an encroaching ideological extremism which apparently some people in norway perceive as a problem. also, again, i think the prayers shutting down portions of cities is mental and its almost impossible to imagine that happening the other way around, in a predominantly islamic nation with a bunch of christian immigrants shutting down several streets across several cities in some mass prayer demonstration, without serious repercussions. try to imagine that and tell me what you think would happen to them. and why would it happen? how would the muslims perceive that?

 

also i gotta point this out just because it was a bit lol, which i noticed was linked to on the side of your first linked article-

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/07/12/sodomy-the-new-jihadi-training-method?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=recommend-button&utm_campaign=Sodomy%2C+the+new+jihadi+training+method%3F

[chenGOD]

 

The one about Muslims calling for sharia law is from 2012 (might be older but that's as far back as I've found in my brief googling), it gets spewed forth on all these stormfront type sites, and is not backed up by anything with a basis in reality (ie Gronland is not controlled by Sharia Law).

I walk through Grønland pretty much every day. It is not a sharia state within the city.

 

 

Shhhhhh you'll burst some bubbles with your "reality" machine.

[MisterE]

well i've linked to articles in what i've seen described as the two biggest newspapers in norway. but i guess they dont factor into reality at all?

[awepittance]

this article may go pretty far into a academic liberal type of thought for some but I thought it was one of the best analysis of why this should not be seen as a pinnacle free speech event

here just look at the title (lol)

Free Speech spectacles are civic-religious rituals in service of colonial civilization

 

Colonialism and imperialism, in their classical or contemporary guises, have many ways of appearing palatable, even decent. Those tropes are easy to identify, because they’ve been reliably deployed for hundreds of years without changing. First, Empire targets a group of people, usually because the population sits on top of great territory or resources, then reduces them to an undifferentiated mass (“Muslims,” for instance). They’re given essential characteristics in order to obscure the aggression against them (“Why are Muslims so angry?”), and imbecilic, power-serving bromides are proffered as an explanation for the current historical moment (“They must hate us for our freedom”). One of the central characteristics, attributed to all targeted groups, is an inherent primitiveness, a lack of civilized values if not civilization itself (“They don’t understand our noble, enlightened Free Speech.”)

It’s that last point, about how progressive values are invoked in the service of imperialism, that makes the fact that Charlie Hebdo is liberal a non-substantive point. It’s been said that the magazine antagonized France’s neo-fascists and advocated for immigrant rights, but those aren’t the ideas being mined from this week’s events. In the English-speaking media, there’s been a back-and-forth about how the more shocking images in Charlie Hebdo are meant to be received. However, even defenses of the magazine from charges of racism concede that the magazine itself (and “the French satire tradition” as a whole) has often made a target of Muslims. Sure, Charlie Hebdomocked the Pope—if it frequently dehumanized a marginalized group in the Empire’s sights as though they’re as strong as one of the world’s most powerful men, then it’s easy to see how that’s useful to power.

While Charlie‘s cartoonists may have claimed that they targeted Islam’s “extremists,” this project fits firmly in the liberal wing of imperialism. According to Professor Deepa Kumar, a key characteristic of liberal Islamophobia is “the recognition that there are ‘good Muslims’ with whom diplomatic relations can be forged.” As opposed to Islamophobia’s “troglodyte version, which is just blatant,” Kumar explains, “there are very complex, sophisticated, and liberal forms,” which make allowances for two types of Muslims: extremist/fundamentalist/terrorist “bad” ones, and “good Muslims, which is people who actually support what the U.S. is trying to do, and nothing in the middle.” According to Vox, separating “bad” Muslims from “good” ones is exactly what Charlie‘s editors claimed to be doing: “The magazine’s own editors have said…its lampooning of radical Islam is aimed at separating out radicalism from mainstream Islam, which is ultimately a service in favor of Islam.” For the sake of progress, Charlie was circulating Arab caricatures to save Islam from itself.

[goDel]

Also, about the aboutaleb discussion and what he means. To understand him, you have to understand the situation in holland. That little country full of people in northern europe.

 

There's basically a bit of tension between the muslim society and the 'rest' (those are rough generalizations to try to explain something). The integration-issues Aboutaleb talks about have to do with criminal-rates which are higher for muslim youth, the level of education (significantly lower), the language they speak (hardly any knowledge of dutch language), to name a few (also some women issues...). So the idea is they're not well integrated. And while they remain in lower social classes (because of language and education issues), the risk of criminal activity and extremist viewpoints tends to get higher. Add to that the tensions which are present internationally (terrorism, extremism) and you've got a mixture of issues which may or may not be related.

I think it's important to notice that there is only a small relation. In essence the terrorism/extremism you see internationally (and mostly within the muslim communities!) seems more like a struggle for power within the muslim communities itself (with some occasional outlash to western countries... Which might be most of all some kind of propaganda campaign to show who has got the power within their community). These issues can show themselves in muslim communities within western societies as well. But the idea is this happens mostly because of issues which stem from being in a lower class.

Imo, Aboutaleb's occasional anger towards the muslim community within dutch society comes from the unwillingness to learn the dutch language, getting proper education and being part of the society. This unwillingness seems to be related to seeing higher values in the culture/religion they originally came from. (Like an unwillingnes to acknowledge dutch laws, and hold sharia law higher)

Not sure if this answers any questions, because the discussion seemed rather 'academic.

[MadameChaos]

It really made me laugh when they banned the hijab in France because it was "oppressive to women" and yet you can walk into any sex shop in Pigalle and find torture porn and beastiality on full display (rows and rows of the stuff). It's really just an excuse to victimise an already marginalised group.

[cear]

je suis hypocrite

[chenGOD]

A)

https://translate.go...t-text=&act=url

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...-terror-threat/

 

so there the reporting is that the demands were matched with an actual terror threat which would classify the guys as 'actual terrorists', which kind of gets away from the point i was trying to make.

 

B) but the other two articles i linked were talking more about an encroaching ideological extremism which apparently some people in norway perceive as a problem.

 

C) also, again, i think the prayers shutting down portions of cities is mental and its almost impossible to imagine that happening the other way around, in a predominantly islamic nation with a bunch of christian immigrants shutting down several streets across several cities in some mass prayer demonstration, without serious repercussions. try to imagine that and tell me what you think would happen to them. and why would it happen? how would the muslims perceive that?

 

 

A) Your first article is again from 2012, and the second CNN article is some of the worst reporting i've ever seen:

 

 

"Norway has long been threatened by Muslim extremists. Al Qaeda leader Ayman Zawahiri mentioned Norway in a recording released back in 2003 -- when he was Osama bin Laden's top deputy, -- that urged Muslims to take a lesson from the 9/11 hijackers and "light a fire under the feet" of the United States, Britain, Australia and Norway by attacking embassies and corporations.

At the time, Norwegian media speculated that al-Zawahiri may have confused Norway with neighboring Denmark. But while Norway did not support the war in Iraq, it did send special forces and fighter planes to Afghanistan as part of the U.S.-led war.

In 2004, Norwegian officials arrested the former leader of an Iraqi Islamic militant group.

In 2006, Norwegian embassies were among the targets of violent protests after newspapers in several countries including Norway published depictions of Islam's Prophet Mohammed.

In 2011, Norway suffered a terrorist attack carried out by Anders Behring Breivik, a right-wing extremist with a hatred of Muslims. Eight people died in a bombing in Oslo, and 69 young people on nearby Utoya island were gunned down.

The following year, the Muslim extremist group Ansar al-Sunna threatened Norway with a 9/11-style attack unless part of the capital, Oslo, was turned into a Muslim nation, the International Business Times reported. "We do not wish to live together with dirty beasts like you," the group wrote in a letter to Norwegian lawmakers and newspaper editors, according to the report."

The key idea there is the threat of terrorist attacks from Muslim extremists yeah? And yet, the only actual terrorist attack they write about is the idiot Breivik. The demands from Ansar al-Sunna were ultimately nothing - be tough for them to accomplish much, seeing as they are based in Iraq and their former leaser is in Norwegian prison (due to be released soon, whereby he should be deported back to Kurdistan, where he'll probably get the death penalty).

 

B) Yeah the perception is the problem - Muslim population of Norway is estimated between 1-3%.

 

C) What kind of false equivalency bullshit is this? We are talking about Muslims in Norway - which happens to respect people's rights to congregate. I'm not arguing that authoritarian regimes don't have their problems, they clearly do. Although up until very recently (I mean within the last 2 years), Christians in most Muslim nations faced little persecution.

[brian trageskin]

thierry meyssan about the "republican march", charlie hebdo etc.: http://www.voltairenet.org/article186458.html

[brian trageskin]

 

january 6 : no one cares about charlie hebdo, except for some extremists

 

january 14 : everyone is buying it, to show the extremists they're doing something wrong

 

:hurrah:

 

french peoples are such heros when it comes to protecting their freedom

Fixt

 

 

the things you read when you haven't got your gun

[phudoshin]

My own contribution on twiiter

 

https://twitter.com/amartwinez/status/555309349447688194/photo/1

[White Rainbow]

thierry meyssan about the "republican march", charlie hebdo etc.: http://www.voltairenet.org/article186458.html

Thierry Meyssan is a douchebag who see conspiracy everywhere. Why do you relay these informations?

 

We live in the golden age of mental confusion where this kind of fellow just make a living out of these sort of hazy kind of claim.

 

Lot of "weak" people follow these jerks just because they cast doubt on "official" statement. But they should learn to think by themselves and seeking the root causing of their own ignorance rather than listening any guru in the web who claim to know more than anyone else.

[triachus]

 

thierry meyssan about the "republican march", charlie hebdo etc.: http://www.voltairenet.org/article186458.html

Thierry Meyssan is a douchebag who see conspiracy everywhere. Why do you relay these informations?

 

We live in the golden age of mental confusion where this kind of fellow just make a living out of these sort of hazy kind of claim.

 

 

Lot of "weak" people follow these jerks just because they cast doubt on "official" statement. But they should learn to think by themselves and seeking the root causing of their own ignorance rather than listening any guru in the web who claim to know more than anyone else.

 

 

just informing you that you're trying to reason with a holocaust denier

[drome]

It really made me laugh when they banned the hijab in France because it was "oppressive to women" and yet you can walk into any sex shop in Pigalle and find torture porn and beastiality on full display (rows and rows of the stuff). It's really just an excuse to victimise an already marginalised group.

Salient point.

Aside from some well informed, open minded individuals like yourself, there are too many many main stream boot lickers using the media's legitimisation of anti-Muslim sentiment as cover for their own latent racism on this board.

Come on people, ffs. Stop swallowing the bullshit the media feeds you.

Fuck politics on watmm.

[Nil]

 

Fuck politics on internet.

 

 

fixed.

[Perezvon]

It really made me laugh when they banned the hijab in France because it was "oppressive to women" and yet you can walk into any sex shop in Pigalle and find torture porn and beastiality on full display (rows and rows of the stuff). It's really just an excuse to victimise an already marginalised group.

Yes and wearing the hijab comes from the choice of women themselves more often than it is said, at least here. If anything they actually have more dignity than a lot of Parisian women eh.

[khov]

get rid of fucking dignity

[khov]

tells us more about the indignity of parisians womens, seems like a cool story