11 dead in French satirical magazine shooting

[Admiral Yi]

Fuck off dps.

[Martinus]

... yes?

His statement has several parts. The first part says he does not identify with with Charlie Hebdo. Later he states that Charlie Hebdo mocked his culture and faith, which is a straight up statement of fact (and not one I believe is controversial).

I think it's reasonable to infer that the statement of fact he provides is the reason for how he identifies, given it's in the same statement and all.

Is this confusing?

I was confused before but now I understand what you're saying.

So we have two separate ideas in this tweet.  One, he objects to CH's treatment of Islam.  Two, one of the dead cops was Muslim.  So I repeat my original question: what's the point he's trying to make?  What is the relationship between these two ideas?

To me the point is clearly "You were ridiculing my faith yet I still died for you. So I am better than you."

Which is why I also find the tweet objectionable/offensive. Both the satirists and the cop were doing their job. If we start to say it is somehow heroic of a cop to do his job and defend rights of people he disagrees with, we get to a very nasty spot.

[Eddie Teach]

If we start to say it is somehow heroic of a cop to do his job and defend rights of people he disagrees with, we get to a very nasty spot.

It is heroic for a cop to do his job when it involves getting shot at, whether he agrees with the victims or not.

[Martinus]

If we start to say it is somehow heroic of a cop to do his job and defend rights of people he disagrees with, we get to a very nasty spot.

It is heroic for a cop to do his job when it involves getting shot at, whether he agrees with the victims or not.

I am not sure - you could say some jobs involve risking your life as a part of job description (e.g. a soldier, a fire fighter or a cop) - but let's set this point aside for the sake of argument.

If this is so, then still there is no point to mention that the newspaper "ridiculed his faith", other than to engage in some guilt-tripping and finger wagging. The cop should do exactly the same whether he defends someone with whom he agrees or not - surely we can agree on that? So pointing out that he disagreed with people he defended serves no purpose other than the one already pointed out by Neil, Yi and I.

[11B4V]

If we start to say it is somehow heroic of a cop to do his job and defend rights of people he disagrees with, we get to a very nasty spot.

It is heroic for a cop to do his job when it involves getting shot at, whether he agrees with the victims or not.

I am not sure - you could say some jobs involve risking your life as a part of job description (e.g. a soldier, a fire fighter, editor for an over the top satirist rag, or a cop) - but let's set this point aside for the sake of argument.

added one for you.

[Eddie Teach]

The cop should and does the same because he has bought into France's democratic society and ideals. As for the sign-maker, he's being a bit of a dick, but also indicating he buys into French society despite disagreements with the cartoonists.

[Martinus]

Arsonists torch German newspaper that printed Charlie Hebdo cartoons - See more at: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/World/2015/Jan-11/283684-arsonists-have-set-fire-to-a-german-newspaper-that-printed-charlie-hebdo-cartoons-afp.ashx#sthash.faCNRoKP.dpuf

BERLIN: A building of German newspaper Hamburger Morgenpost was the target of an arson attack and two suspects were arrested, police said on Sunday.

Like many other German newspapers, Hamburger Morgenpost has printed cartoons of French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo after the deadly attack on Wednesday in Paris.

A police spokeswoman said that an incendiary device was thrown at the newspaper building in the night and documents were burned inside. Two suspects were arrested near the crime scene because they behaved in an unusual manner, she added.

The newspaper said on its web page that there were no people inside the building when the attack happened. Whether the arson attack was connected to the Charlie Hebdo cartoons was still under investigation, the paper added.

Police said state security had taken over the investigations.

So, this happened too. I would be interested to learn whether the attackers were a part of an organised terrorist cell or a couple of opportunist Muslims who decided to retaliate against the newspaper's decision to print the cartoons. Or is the politically correct view now that any Muslim who commits a terrorist act immediately becomes a terrorist and, as such, is not representative of the moderate Muslim community any more?

To paraphrase Bill Maher, if there are so many bad apples, perhaps there is something wrong with the orchard.

[11B4V]

Arsonists torch German newspaper that printed Charlie Hebdo cartoons - See more at: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/World/2015/Jan-11/283684-arsonists-have-set-fire-to-a-german-newspaper-that-printed-charlie-hebdo-cartoons-afp.ashx#sthash.faCNRoKP.dpuf

BERLIN: A building of German newspaper Hamburger Morgenpost was the target of an arson attack and two suspects were arrested, police said on Sunday.

Like many other German newspapers, Hamburger Morgenpost has printed cartoons of French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo after the deadly attack on Wednesday in Paris.

A police spokeswoman said that an incendiary device was thrown at the newspaper building in the night and documents were burned inside. Two suspects were arrested near the crime scene because they behaved in an unusual manner, she added.

The newspaper said on its web page that there were no people inside the building when the attack happened. Whether the arson attack was connected to the Charlie Hebdo cartoons was still under investigation, the paper added.

Police said state security had taken over the investigations.

This sounds so wrong coming from Germany.

[The Brain]

Arsonists torch German newspaper that printed Charlie Hebdo cartoons - See more at: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/World/2015/Jan-11/283684-arsonists-have-set-fire-to-a-german-newspaper-that-printed-charlie-hebdo-cartoons-afp.ashx#sthash.faCNRoKP.dpuf

BERLIN: A building of German newspaper Hamburger Morgenpost was the target of an arson attack and two suspects were arrested, police said on Sunday.

Like many other German newspapers, Hamburger Morgenpost has printed cartoons of French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo after the deadly attack on Wednesday in Paris.

A police spokeswoman said that an incendiary device was thrown at the newspaper building in the night and documents were burned inside. Two suspects were arrested near the crime scene because they behaved in an unusual manner, she added.

The newspaper said on its web page that there were no people inside the building when the attack happened. Whether the arson attack was connected to the Charlie Hebdo cartoons was still under investigation, the paper added.

Police said state security had taken over the investigations.

So, this happened too. I would be interested to learn whether the attackers were a part of an organised terrorist cell or a couple of opportunist Muslims who decided to retaliate against the newspaper's decision to print the cartoons. Or is the politically correct view now that any Muslim who commits a terrorist act immediately becomes a terrorist and, as such, is not representative of the moderate Muslim community any more?

To paraphrase Bill Maher, if there are so many bad apples, perhaps there is something wrong with the orchard.

No sane person thinks that terrorists just represent small groups of whatever collective they belong to (Muslims, Leftists, Rightists etc). There's always a pyramid. For every one who engages in terrorist attacks there's a bunch of people who have given it serious thought, and for every one of those there's a bunch of people who think that someone should definitely make terrorist attacks, and for every one of those etc etc etc. Active terrorists are just the tip of the pyramid, and with a big tip (as in Islam) there's a correspondingly big body.

[Legbiter]

A response from one of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists. Not bad.

Je Suis Charlie? Not so fast. A cartoonist at the Paris-based satirical magazine says surviving Charlie Hebdo employees are unimpressed by the rising tide of worldwide support.

"We vomit on all these people who suddenly say they are our friends," Bernard Holtrop, a cartoonist for the satirical weekly, told Dutch daily Volkskrant

http://m.nydailynews.com/news/world/charlie-hebdo-cartoonist-scoffs-vomits-supporters-article-1.2072906

*edit* Life lesson learned: Avoid meetings.

[Martinus]

Yeah, I saw that before. They hate the likes of Front Nationale as much as they hate Islamists.

Which is fine - I feel exactly the same way.

[Eddie Teach]

Yeah, I saw that before. They hate the likes of Front Nationale as much as they hate Islamists.

Le Pen certainly wasn't pretending to be their friend though...

[Martinus]

Yeah, I saw that before. They hate the likes of Front Nationale as much as they hate Islamists.

Le Pen certainly wasn't pretending to be their friend though...

She was. Her father wasn't.

[Duque de Bragança]

Yeah, I saw that before. They hate the likes of Front Nationale as much as they hate Islamists.

Le Pen certainly wasn't pretending to be their friend though...

She was. Her father wasn't.

She wasn't as well but tried to exploit the situation for political purposes, like François Hollande in another way. Says one of the Charlie Hebdo members

« NOUS VOMISSONS SUR TOUS CES GENS QUI, SUBITEMENT, DISENT ÊTRE NOS AMIS »
Dans Les Inrocks, le dessinateur Luz, rescapé de l'attentat du 7 janvier, estime de son côté que « la charge symbolique actuelle est tout ce contre quoi Charlie a toujours travaillé ». Il ajoute :
« C'est formidable que les gens nous soutiennent mais on est dans un contre-sens de ce que sont les dessins de 'Charlie'. (...) Cet unanimisme est utile à Hollande pour ressouder la nation. Il est utile à Marine Le Pen pour demander la peine de mort.

En savoir plus sur http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2015/01/10/unanimite-des-hommages-a-charlie-un-contre-sens_4553578_3224.html#4Q4pWjQ412M50TGz.99

This unanimity attitude is useful for Hollande to unite again the nation, and for Marine le Pen to ask for the return of death penalty.

[Duque de Bragança]

today on our radio came the conclusion (by a cultural muslim) that one of the giant factors for this bullshit are the Saoudi-petrodollars at work in spreading their vile wahabism/salafism. And one of the actions needed to diminish the threat of more episodes like this one following is disallowing the saoudi's (or anyone like them) to fund, spread or otherwise insinuate their doctrine in our countries, or for that matter: anywhere else in the world that's not their own shithole of a country.

So our response should be to ban attempts to spread ideas we don't agree with?  Sort of like how Russia has banned advocating for gay rights?

Sorry, no.  That shit might fly in Europe or Quebec, but in the US we'll left idiots spout bad ideas, and counter them by advocating good ideas.

Apples and oranges, surveillance of radical imams and banning of hate speech in mosques is hardly comparable to (self)censuring cartoons in a satirical newspaper.
Given the above mentioned cartoons were seldom reprinted in the major US media (Washington Post, NYT), colour me skeptical for the much-vaunted US free speech. Free speech for self-censorship, yes.