It is as though M. Charbonnier wished to have himself taken out of the gene-pool. His magazine’s previous publication of insulting cartoons depicting the Prophet, had resulted in its offices being fire-bombed and subsequently placed under permanent (and ineffective) police protection. His last cartoon was a blatant challenge to the Islamist crazies to have another go. In the week before his demise, Charbonnier (which appropriately translates as ‘coal-merchant’) had challenged the Islamist victims of his taunting pen to deliver to him what he knew they saw as his just reward. The text reads: “Still no terrorist attacks in France – Wait, we have until the end of January to send you our best wishes”.
Unlike M. Stephane Charbonnier, the late editor of Charlie Hebdo, and his multiple French, Israeli and other public sympathisers, I am emphatically not a Charlie. I cannot feel empathy with a man who made a career from deliberately reducing the amount of harmony between the peoples of the planet. Had M. Charbonnier delighted in walking down the Champs Elysees and saying to anyone he encountered wearing a bushy beard and a black hat or kippah, “Go back to Israel, you religious crazy” (which, given the Western rules for freedom of expression, would have been within his rights) would crowds of French bystanders have approved? The fact that French citizens have earned the privilege and legal freedom to gratuitously insult their fellows (and in M. Charbonnier’s case, make money out of doing so) doesn’t mean that they should be so ill-mannered and ill-disciplined as to abuse that right. Certainly, it is most unlikely that M.Charbonnier would have indulged himself in this way. In 2009, Charlie Hebdo sacked one of its journalists for anti-Semitic views. https://www.worldbulletin.net/world/152585/charlie-hebdo-fired-cartoonist-for-anti-semitism-in-2009
In the instance of his final cartoon, instead of picking on passing Jews to insult, he heroically chose to pick on a bunch of Kalashnikov-wielding louts, the balance of whose minds was clearly disturbed and whom, he knew had a long record of violent murders behind them. Going up to them, he waves his pen in their faces, makes fun of what he knows to be their most cherished beliefs and says “make my day – punks,” or words to that effect. He cannot have been all that surprised, when they did.
Consequently he, some of his colleagues and several innocent bystanders are dead. He is a martyr to the secular freedoms on which his culture taught him to place especial value (and to a particularly arrogant view of multiculturism that it gives carte-blanche to deliberately insult and puncture the integrity of other cultures sharing the same society.) As a direct result of his standing up for his ‘principles,’ the three punks in question are also dead, likewise martyrs to deeply held beliefs.
Who benefits from this pathetic tale? Whatever the true story behind it, there will be people in the French and other western security agencies, who will be delighted by the event. The media’s mongering of fear and loathing will give them license to increase their anti-democratic powers.
Equally delighted, will be the Israeli government’s agencies. Only a week prior to this event, a now chastised France, to Israeli fury, had voted for Palestinian statehood at the UN. In the past, Israel has sought to generate a sense of insecurity in French Jews in order to inspire them to leave Europe and bolster the number of settlers on Palestinian land. https://www.rense.com/general54/sharontofrenchjews.htm In Tel Aviv, the secondary incident, which followed on from the Hebdo massacre and involved the murder of Jewish hostages, must have appeared as manna from heaven in this respect. Furthermore, every increase in western Islamaphobia is welcomed by Israel’s leaders as it increases their sense of impunity for their on-going crimes against the dispossessed Palestinians.
As every boost to Islamaphobia results in increased discrimination and harassment of the West’s Muslim minorities, the greatest beneficiaries of the murders, will be the Islamic State’s recruiters. They can now anticipate a fresh French influx of Kalashnikov-fodder to the killing fields they are cultivating in the Middle East and, soon to be, North Africa.
It is a genetic trait of humans that under particular circumstances, they can develop a militant enthusiasm for a socially binding ideology. Given modern weaponry, this characteristic is non-adaptive. Though the Old Testament leaves plenty of room for smiting other peoples, if you look at the Christian religion, Jesus’s prohibition of all forms of violence is clearly laid out in the New Testament. Despite Christ’s teachings, in recent times, the ‘Christian’ West (with French armed forces well to the fore) has bombed and devastated multiple Muslim countries and inflicted death and destruction on their societies.
Jesus’s proclaimed pacifism seems to have made little impact on the behaviour of these western governments in their violent interactions with Muslim cultures. The fault lies with individual Christians and not with Christianity. Likewise, the West should not blame the Islamic religion per se for the violence emanating out of Muslim countries.
Next to Mohammed, Jesus is a prophet revered by Muslims. Allah, as described in the Islamic scriptures, is the creator of all things and of all life on Earth. His three defining characteristics are that he is almighty, he is generous and he is merciful. In light of the above, and ignoring the previous Christian and current Jewish experience, one might still ask, how, in the name of Allah, can a small portion of his most militant enthusiasts become convinced that they should carry out assassinations in his name?
The most illogical of the fanatics go even further than the murder of unbelievers. The leaders of the Islamic State believe that they will earn an entry ticket to Paradise if they eradicate from Allah’s Earth other Moslems, who disagree as to the correct interpretation of the scriptures. Hence the violent sectarian Shia-Sunni divide between parties that view each other as apostates, but both of which fully accept the Prophet’s teachings. (The quarrel, in which France has chosen to become involved and in which New Zealand’s government has also expressed its intention to do so, relates to events following upon Mohammad’s death in 632 A.D. Should the earthly caliphate Mohammed established prior to his departure, have been passed on, not to his father-in-law, but to his grandsons? That it should have been the father-in-law who inherited, is one of the foundation stones of the Islamic State and is currently providing justification for its mass-executions of Shia.)
Nor should the Western nations, now suffering blowback from their actions, be held as innocent parties in this stirring of Islamic fanaticism. This Islamisation of resentment and resistance has been greatly aided by the West’s attempts to promote and use Islamic fanaticism as a weapon against its secular foes. Hence the Mujahideen, who fought the Soviet invaders of Afghanistan with the cry of Allahu Akhbar, were trained, armed and encouraged by the USA, with the Saudi Arabian government providing funding and the ideological backbone.
Israel’s nemesis, Islamist Hamas, was encouraged in its early development, by the Mossad as a useful counter-balance to Arafat’s secular Palestine Liberation Organisation and, in line with the Israeli Right’s determination, as a sure-fire destroyer of the Oslo accords. https://globalresearch.ca/articles/ZER403A.html
Hezbollah, the only Moslem force that has been able to successfully resist the Israeli Defence Force, started as a peasant militia fighting to expel Israeli invaders from their Lebanese lands and being forced to emphasise their Shia identity in order to gain the support of the Islamic regime in Iran.
The results of the active American and British support of Islamic fundamentalist opponents to the secular Syrian regime are clear for all to see. https://www.thenation.com/blog/173318/cia-takes-opposite-sides-syria-and-iraq#
At the present time, with so much suffering and desperation in the Islamic world, there is no shortage of Moslems who have been radicalised to the extent that they believe that though Allah is almighty, it is upon them to read his mind, interpret his wishes and carry out on his behalf, the destruction of human beings he has created. The ability to so warp a religious ideal, would lead one to believe that such radical fanaticism is a form of mental disturbance or psychosis. And here I return to the death of M. Charbonnier. Surely it is a form of both cruelty and reckless lunacy to deliberately provoke aroused and armed psychotics? They should instead be humoured, while remedies to their condition are sought.
For the western world, the best possible remedy is to avoid further provocations. Western nations should avoid all actions that could possibly add to the number of dead Muslims. At the same time they should attempt to recompense for past invasions, air assaults, arms supplies, training of secret police forces, coups d’états, etc. This they could attempt to do, by helping care for those impoverished and made homeless and injured in the bloody chaos that western interaction with the Muslim world has instigated.
But that is just theoretical dreaming and such a solution, if attempted, could only take effect over a prolonged period. The sad fact is that the western nations and Israel, as presently constituted and with their public opinion still firmly in the grips of a pro-Zionist media, are not going to change their habits any time soon. Consequently, the West and Israel can expect an ever increasing conflict with the Islamic world.
Professors will continue to lose their jobs in America should they sympathy with the two thousand or so inhabitants of Gaza, recently massacred by Israelis armed with freely gifted American weaponry. More Muslim residents of western nations will be harassed and even imprisoned for expressions of hostility towards the West’s imposed world order. No one, anywhere in the mainstream western media would ever dare publish an anti-Israeli cartoon. French pride in their freedom of speech and their multi-culturism will continue to be manifested in anti-Muslim ranting and support for their government’s policies of joining America in support of Israel and the bombing of Muslim countries.
All this leaves western society facing a major dilemma as to how it should treat those immigrants, whose culture does not readily allow them to adopt a secular viewpoint and accept fully the idea that when in Rome, they should do as the Romans do? The challenge will be to contain the problem of home-bred Islamic terrorism, while at the same time preserving the values that make western societies a pleasure to live in. Almost certainly some compromises are going to have to be made. Given the highly infectious nature of religious enthusiasm, it may well be necessary, to have some sort of procedure to isolate those known to have become infected by the virus of political violence, before they actually commit a crime.
The perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo massacre were already known to the police as potentially violent Islamist fanatics. With hind-sight, once clearly identified for the ticking bombs their beliefs represented, they should have been given the choice of emigration to a land less conflicted with their views, or of entering preventative detention (possibly on an Island somewhere, which could be set up with a regime ruled by Sharia Law!) The one move that would appear most ill-advised is, as New Zealand is currently attempting to do, to confiscate Islamists’ passports and thus retain the carriers of the virus, with its suppressed potential for violence, within a community that wants none of it.
Having shown the draft of this blog to a peer-reviewer, a student of philosophy, he came back with the following comment.
“Mohamed’s teachings …are contradictory, and they are also extremely violent, sexist, xenophobic and actively encouraging conquest and aggression. So, if the Koran is the holy book, who is to say that they should cherry-pick just the ‘nice passages’? Surely, if it is all the words of God and therefore all of the Koran is equally valid, from the bad to the good. So, no, they (Muslim terrorists) are not at variance with the tenets of Islam, they are merely interpreting it differently, and therefore, well within their rights under Islam to do so, hence the reason that Islam is such an evil, nasty religion.”
The above opinion is widespread in the Western world and certainly, Zionist influence over the media has much to do with its currency.
Islam, as the third of the great religions founded on the Old Testament, is six hundred year younger than Christianity. Five hundred years ago, the Thirty Years War, 1618-1648, was a sectarian war between European Catholic and Protestant Christians with both sides slaying each other in the name of God. It resulted in over seven million deaths, with parts of Germany seeing a population decline of up to 60%. Until into the seventeenth century Christians were still executing Christians for heresy. The burning at the stake of the last Englishman to be convicted of heresy, took place in 1612. In Britain’s American colonies, three Quakers were hung for heresy in the 1660s. It wasn’t until 1832, that the Spanish Inquisition executed its last so called heretic – a School teacher charged with having Deist sympathies. Given the above, could not my peer-viewer’s comments be equally well applied to the Christian faith? The Old and New Testaments have not changed in the interim.
Nor is Judaism exempt from the inspiration to violence by religious leaders who can find what is being sought in Delphic scriptures open to multiple interpretations.
In modern times, the human tendency, when under pressure, to fall back on a religious identity and theological argument is not limited to societies of Islamic persuasion. It is also apparent in latter-day colonial Israel. The initial Zionist settlements and Israeli governments were secular and nationalist in character. The Zionist terrorists, who first cleared out the British and then the native Arabs, were politically motivated, rather than inspired by religious fanaticism. As Israel has become increasingly isolated from the West and in ever greater need of social cohesion in its attempt to retain and expand the territories it has stolen from infuriated Muslims, it has placed increasing emphasis on its religious identity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Patriarchs_massacre Not only can Islamic mullahs’ be found, who use the Koran to justify the slaying of unbelievers by the Muslim faithful. Nowadays, there are also rabbis who claim that the killing of gentiles and their children conforms with the Jewish religious code. https://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/2.209/west-bank-rabbi-jews-can-kill-gentiles-who-threaten-israel-1.4496 Religious penetration of what was once a secular Israeli Defence Force, proceeds apace and with it, a gathering indifference to the sufferings inflicted on Palestinian Untermenschen.
It is impossible to look at Jewish and Christian current actions, take note of their history and make any claim that Islam is a religion that is any more “evil and nasty” than the other two sister religions. By allowing themselves to be gripped by such unreasoned prejudice, western nations are simply embracing the future of conflict they wish to avoid.