Terrorism and Nuance 934


There is no question to which the answer is to wander round killing people. It takes a few words or keystrokes for any right thinking person to condemn the killings in Paris today. But that really doesn’t take us very far.

It is impossible to stop evil from happening. Simple low tech attacks by individuals, a kind of DIY terrorism, cannot always be pre-empted. If you try to do so universally, you will end up even further down the line we have gone down in the UK, where people are continually arrested and harassed who have no connection to terrorism at all, often for bragging on websites. These non-existent foiled terrorist plots are a risible feature of British politics nowadays. Every now and then one hits the headlines, like the arrests just before Remembrance Day. Their defining characteristic is that none of those arrested have any means of terrorism – 99% of those arrested for terrorism in the UK in the last decade – possessed no weapon and no viable explosive device.

In fact the only terrorist in the last year convicted in the UK, who possessed an actual bomb – a very viable explosive device indeed, was not charged with terrorism. He was a fascist named Ryan McGee who had a swastika on his wall and hated Muslims. Hundreds of Muslims with no weapons are locked up for terrorism. A fanatical anti-Muslim with a bomb is by definition not a terrorist.

I am assuming that the narrative that Charlie Hebdo was attacked by Islamists is correct, though that remains to be proved. For argument, let us assume the official narrative is true and the killings were by Muslims outraged at the magazine’s depictions of the Prophet Mohammed.

It is essential to free speech that it includes the freedom to offend. That must include the freedom to offend religious belief. Without such freedoms, the values of societies would freeze. Much social progress has caused real anguish and offence to some people. To have stopped Charlie Hebdo by law would have been wrong. To stop them by bullets is beyond any mitigation.

But that doesn’t make the unfortunate deceased heroes, and President Hollande was wrong to characterise them as such. Being murdered does not make you a hero. And being offensive is not necessarily noble. People who are persistently and vociferously offensive are often neither noble nor well-motivated. Much of Charlie Hebdo‘s taunting of Muslims was really unpleasant. That they also had Christian and other targets did not make this any better. It is not Private Eye – it is a magazine with a much nastier edge. I defend the right of Charlie Hebdo to publish whatever it wants. But once the shock dies off, I do hope a more realistic assessment of whether Charlie Hebdo was entirely admirable or not may be possible. This in no way excuses the dreadful murders.

The ability to say things that offend is an important attribute of a free society. Richard Dawkins may offend believers. Peter Tatchell may offend homophobes. Pussy Riot offended Putin and the Orthodox Church. This must not be stopped.

But that must cut both ways. Abu Qatada broke no British laws in his lengthy stay in the UK, but was demonised for things he said (or even things newspapers invented he had said). Most of the French who are today in solidarity for freedom of expression, are against people being able to express themselves freely in what they wear. The security industry who are all over TV today want to respond to this attack on freedom of expression by more controls on the internet!

I condemn, you condemn, we all condemn, and so we should. But the amount of nuanced thought in the mainstream media is almost non-existent. What will now happen is that conservative commentators will rip individual phrases from this article and tweet them to show I support terrorism. The lack of nuanced thought is a reflection of a general atmosphere of anti-intellectualism which has poisoned public life in modern western society.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

934 thoughts on “Terrorism and Nuance

1 9 10 11 12 13 32
  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    Macky scolds Craig:

    “That appears rather like a case of an acute case of cognitive dissonance; you think that people should have the right to Free Speech, but just not on your Blog ?!!”
    _______________

    You are presumably happy that Squonk has banned me from his blog.

    But I recall you actively approving that and did not hear anything from you about freedom of speech on that occasion.

    Would you like to tell us why it is OK for Squonk to restrict my freedom of speech but not OK for Craig to ban Holocaust denial posts?

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    Baal-Komodo

    “Cut and run, eh, Jemand? How about answering Clark’s question?”
    ______________

    Hmmmm.

    Jemand probably works for a living and is not a retired codger like yourself with too much time on his hands.

    But glad to see you are in favour of people answering questions put to them; I’m sure you’ll henceforth encourage people to answer my questions as well?

  • Macky

    Habbabkuk; “Would you like to tell us why it is OK for Squonk to restrict my freedom of speech but not OK for Craig to ban Holocaust denial posts?”

    Simples, because I’m not a hypocrite.

    Try engaging some of your self-acclaimed “intellectual fire-power” to see if you can work it out.

    (Nice sly try to turn this into a Holocausr Denial issue, but the issue is about Prnciples, and about the Principle of Free Speech in particular).

  • J Galt

    Just as France proposes detente with Russia and an easing of sanctions in a desperate attempt to save her economy this happens.

    What a coincidence.

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    Macky

    “Habbabkuk; “Would you like to tell us why it is OK for Squonk to restrict my freedom of speech but not OK for Craig to ban Holocaust denial posts?”

    Simples, because I’m not a hypocrite.”
    _______________

    ??????

    ********************

    “(Nice sly try to turn this into a Holocausr Denial issue, but the issue is about Prnciples, and about the Principle of Free Speech in particular).”
    ______________

    I think you’ll find that the Holocaust and Holocaust denial came up in posts before mine……raised by some of your buddies.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Required reading on the cause of terrorism:

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/10/18/its-the-occupation-stupid/

    In the decade since 9/11, the United States has conquered and occupied two large Muslim countries (Afghanistan and Iraq), compelled a huge Muslim army to root out a terrorist sanctuary (Pakistan), deployed thousands of Special Forces troops to numerous Muslim countries (Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, etc.), imprisoned hundreds of Muslims without recourse, and waged a massive war of ideas involving Muslim clerics to denounce violence and (initiated, -BZ) new institutions to bring Western norms to Muslim countries. Yet Americans still seem strangely mystified as to why some Muslims might be angry about this situation.

  • Macky

    Habbabkuk; ??????

    Since I apparently really need to spell it out;

    I have never stated a belief in the principle of complete Free Speech; and as far as I know, either has Squonk, but our Host has.

  • DavidH

    I’m in 2 minds on this one.

    On the one hand, it’s so outrageous to get driven to a murderous frenzy just because somebody else drew a picture you didn’t like, I say every newspaper that claims to stand for freedom of expression should re-print the “offending” cartoon with every story covering these events. Why don’t they? That’s what the story is about. A picture. People should be holding up copies of the picture on the streets of Paris. We should all be wearing badges of the picture. No matter if we agree with the sentiment with which the cartoon was drawn, the right to draw it is important.

    On the other hand, if you kick a mad dog, knowing it’s a mad dog, you are going to get bitten. And whose fault is that? We should certainly hunt down the mad dog and kill it before it bites anybody else, but it’s still hardly the dogs fault and we wouldn’t say everybody has a right a kick mad dogs without being bitten. It’s the nature of mad dogs and we should beware of them.

  • Mark Golding

    Glenn_uk
    9 Jan, 2015 – 1:39 am

    I would have thought rational, sensible and wise to view Hebdo as suspicious in this horrifying paradigm in which we conduct our lives. Such reactions are expected, predictable, even spontaneous after that ‘new pearl harbor’ and the violation that was the Iraq war, killing over a million to date on a lie, a pretense, falsification of evidence and a secretiveness that prevents scrutiny, retribution and mea culpa of war crimes such that the bereaved families, the orphans, the maimed teenagers who avoid mirrors, the mutant babies and limbless puberty cannot reach closure and peace.

    Such hideous deeds exploit our minds and reveal instinct, perception and foresight without which we are not human, unable to evolve.

  • Rehmat

    The western definition of “Islamist” is political and has nothing to do with the faith of Islam. In the near past, anyone hated by the Western Establishment was called “Communist”.

    The Charlie Hebdo magazine is a Right-Wing magazine which hides its hatred of Christianity, Islam, nationalism and anti-Israel critics under the garb of satirical cartoons and freedom of speech – but doesn’t give same rights to the Holocaust deniers.

    On Wednesday, a few minutes before the terrorist attack, the Charlie Hebdo tweeted a cartoon of Israeli-trained ISIS leaderAbu Bakr Al-Baghdadi (born as Simon Elliot to Zionist Jewish parents). “Best wishes and good health,” the caption read.

    Though none of the perpetrators has been captured, the French authorities have named the gunmen as Said Kouachi and Cherif Kouachi and Hamyd Mourad. The Kouachi brothers were orphans and raised at a state-run orphanage. Several of Hamyd’s school friends have taken to Twitter saying he was in class with them at the time of the attack.

    If the shooting was to punish the magazine staff for republishing the insulting Danish cartoons, the office was already firebombed in 2011 for that reason. But even if the ISIL goons wanted another revenge, they should have attacked Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten office. It was newspaper’s Jewish editor Flemming Rose, who commissioned and published the cartoons in the first place in 2006.

    http://rehmat1.com/2015/01/09/mossad-visits-charlie-hebdo-office-in-paris/

  • Ron Sizely

    “Pussy Riot offended Putin and the Orthodox Church. This must not be stopped.”

    Sorry Craig, I disagree on that one.

    It’s not ok to go into a church and scream obscenities.

    As for “offended Putin” – you’re buying into the Western MSM bullshit. Who says they offended him? If they did, they probably offended him much earlier, during the orgy-in-the-museum or the sex-with-a-chicken-in-a-shop or the shoplifting-dressed-as-a-priest episodes, etc etc etc. Yet they weren’t prosecuted over any of those, were they?

  • oddie

    preparing to neutralise!

    Police Reportedly In Negotiations With Hostage-Holding Paris Suspects
    (With reporting by AP, Reuters, AFP, BBC, Sky News, CNN, and RTL)
    An Interior Ministry spokesman says there is “near certainty” that the suspects — brothers Cherif and Said Kouachi — are in an industrial building surrounded by police…
    French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve says an operation is under way to “neutralize” the suspects.
    The development comes after police reportedly engaged in a car chase with the Kouachi brothers, in which shots were fired.
    Early reports of casualties on January 9 have since been denied.
    The suspects are believed to have taken at least one hostage, reportedly a woman…
    http://www.rferl.org/content/paris-attack-charlie-hebdo-massacre-suspects-manhunt/26784141.html

    Reports also said that when the suspects stormed into the CTD printing company in Dammartin-en-Goële this morning,they shook hands with a member of staff, and told him to get out saying “we don’t kill civilians”…
    This is unconfirmed but we are hearing the suspects have told French police they are “prepared to die as martyrs”…
    THe GIPN (Groupes d’intervention de la Police Nationale) unit, which is one of the elite units on the scene this morning as published photos of the operation to “neutralise” the Kouachi brothers…
    There’s a huge frenzy of police activity, with dozens of police cars and vans coming and going. The village has been completely sealed off by police, with all roads leading to Dammartin-en-Goële having been closed.
    There are huge numbers of police holding assault rifles around the building where the Kouachi brothers are holed up along with their hostage…
    Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve confirmed that an operation was under way to “neutralise” the suspects as the massive manhunt appeared to be reaching a dramatic climax with helicopters buzzing overhead…
    As many as five police helicopters are in the air over the village of Dammartin-en-Goële with specialist elite forces..
    Earlier reports from French media said that two people had died and 20 were injured in an exchange of gunfire between police and the Kouachi brothers…
    http://www.thelocal.fr/20150109/live-charlie-hebdo-france-gunmen-kouachi

  • oddie

    Seth Lipsky is editor of The New York Sun. He was a foreign editor and a member of the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal, founding editor of The Forward and editor from 1990 to 2000:

    7 Jan: Haaretz: Seth Lipsky: Will the Charlie Hebdo attack bring France out of its corner in the war on Islamist terror?
    And how will the free press feel, after it supported Edward Snowden or Julian Assange, if it discovers that closer state surveillance could have foreseen the Paris massacre?
    France has seen some appalling crimes – including attacks against Jews – that could be linked, broadly, to the global war against Islamist terror…
    The magazine has been particularly unbridled in its mocking Islamists from a left-of-center perspective…
    In 2011, Charlie Hebdo was fire-bombed after it issued one of its most famous covers, which “renamed” the magazine Charia Hebdo. The paper, while stridently secular, had also – particularly under its previous editor, Philippe Val – tilted toward Israel…
    I was reminded of that by an ex-colleague, Michel Gurfinkiel, a Paris-based pro-Israel journalist who characterized Val, a comedian, as having gone in the opposite direction of, say, Sine, another writer for Charlie Hebdo, and the comedian Dieudonné M’bala M’bala, who mocks Jews, uses a parody of the Hitler salute, and is banned from performing in France. Val left Charlie Hebdo several years ago. While at the paper, he took what Gurfinkiel calls a hard line that it was inappropriate to demonize the Jewish state…
    http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.635882

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Something slightly strange about this. Google ‘Hamid Murad’ for ‘past hour’ and very nearly all the hits you get are from the Balkans and Turkey. No English, no French. Murad’s of Algerian extraction. Slow news day in Banja Luka and Istanbul?

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Oddie – it is a sad and locally well known fact that most of the NY press is Jewish-owned.

  • oddie

    Charlie Hebdo is not what it used to be…

    Democracy Now: Comics Legend Art Spiegelman & Scholar Tariq Ramadan on Charlie Hebdo & the Power Dynamic of Satire
    TARIQ RAMADAN: No, look, I cannot agree with him (Spigelman) on one point, the way he is describing Charlie Hebdo. He’s talking about Hara-Kiri, that was much before Charlie Hebdo became what it is now. Why don’t you say in 2008 that one of the cartoonists was fired because he dared to say something about the—connecting this to the son of Sarkozy and making a joke about the fact that, you know, he was a Jew? And he was fired…
    And we know that also, just to be clear on that, they had financial problem, and these controversies and ongoing controversies, they were making some money out of it. And I am not saying this as somebody who is outside. This was said by many, many people, saying they are going too far with a target…
    ART SPIEGELMAN: No, after—after their offices were firebombed, I think all bets are off in terms of discourse. At that point, they were mandated to respond.
    TARIQ RAMADAN: No, no, it’s the last six years. The last six years, they have been targeting mainly the Muslim—
    ***ART SPIEGELMAN: You know, I don’t read Charlie Hebdo. I don’t read French that well, so I have to only look at the pictures, and pulling from that.
    TARIQ RAMADAN: So, it’s—no, no, I’m sorry.
    ART SPIEGELMAN: But I’ve seen anti-Semitic caricatures in Charlie Hebdo in the last six years. So, that’s not true.
    TARIQ RAMADAN: No, no, I can tell you that six—so tell me. Tell me, why did they fire somebody? And the question was freedom of expression. And, you know, their response was what, coming from Philippe Val, who is now the director of France Inter? Saying, “No, there are limits to freedom of expression.” This was six years ago. And you are telling me now that they are not—they are freedom—
    ART SPIEGELMAN: That’s why he’s not the head of Charlie anymore.
    TARIQ RAMADAN: No, no, no. That’s the point. That’s the point. It’s not because of this, because the president gave him the direction of France Inter, if you just look at the dynamic with him. So the point here, once again, is for us to say, please, if this is your take on equal treatment, we have to go as far as to assess this on facts, not on the past of this magazine…
    ART SPIEGELMAN: Why were they targeting Muslims? Do you think it’s—
    TARIQ RAMADAN: I’m not—you know why? You know what? You know why? It’s mainly a question of money. They went bankrupt, and you know this. They went bankrupt over the last two years. And what they did with this controversy is that Islam today and to target Muslims is making money. It has nothing to do with courage. It has to do with making money and targeting the marginalized people in the society…
    Charlie Hebdo is not the satirical magazine of the past. It is now ideologically oriented. And Philippe Val, who was a leftist in the past, now is supporting all the theses of the far-right party, very close to the Front National. So, don’t come with something which is politically completely not accurate…
    http://www.democracynow.org/2015/1/8/comics_legend_art_spiegelman_scholar_tariq

  • Ba'al Zevul

    While I agree with Ron Sizely –

    It’s not ok to go into a church and scream obscenities.

    It certainly isn’t. See this:

    http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200203/ldselect/ldrelof/95/9507.htm

    And it’s worth pointing out that Putin did not at once summarily execute Pussy Riot in cold blood.

    I think lines have to be drawn consistently, though. If it’s ok to make images of the Prophet (whose religion prohibits any such thing) and mock them, then it has to be ok to go into church and scream obscenities, and to draw Der Sturmer – style cartoons depicting rapacious stereotype Jews. As CH did, from time to time.

    So if you’re going to permit screaming obscenities in church, Craig, I hope* you will now encourage the equally inoffensive deniers of the holocaust you have hitherto banished from these comments. Fair’s fair. Though you may have to change the law a bit.

    *No, not really. Retake Sarcasm 101, please.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    And,-oh yes – you once moderated out a comment of mine because it linked to s Der Sturmer cartoon, didn’t you? Hmmm.

  • OldMark

    I’m not saying Charlie was an F.F., but it’s a possibility, especially as the French politicians in their memorial March this Sunday have uninvited the likely next president of France and her party. It’s therefore a very political thing!

    YouKnowMy Name- the ‘likely next President of France and her party’ may indeed be the main beneficiaries of this incident thanks to this pretty blatant snub by the French establishment, but that surely undercuts the ‘false flag’ scenario presented by Canspeccy and others. Or are we to believe that Marine Le Pen really is one of the ‘EU 1%ers’, and part of the current ‘French regime’ that hopes to capitalise on this event via the extension of security state powers ?

  • Rob

    We’ve heard a lot about free speech but methinks it doesn’t count for much if you haven’t got a voice. I don’t know about France, but I can’t think of any MSM outlet in the UK that reflects Muslim opinion other than as something observed from an outside perspective.

    Yesterday, Douglas Murray form the Henry Jackson society used BBC R4 to set out the argument that UK newspapers who do not publish obscene or blasphemous references to Mohammed are actually bullied into silence (their free speech is suppressed), he does not consider the possibility that they refrain because they don’t want to give gratuitous offence.

    Earlier in the day BBC R4 broadcast a short programme that mentioned a play to be put on by the Royal Court Theatre concerning the holocaust. This proved to be extremely controversial, the MSM condemned the play, those offended had their “free speech” and the play was pulled. The offended did not have to use violence to get their way. No one said the theatre was being bullied, they were simply shamed into compliance.

    Listening to D Murray & Co, there is no chance that the Muslim community would be given such a full and open handed hearing.

  • Arbed

    While I found the murders of Charlie Hebdo staff in Paris shocking and horrible, I am almost equally sickened by the hypocrisy of what some commentators have had to say about free speech since.

    Take comedian Thom Phipps, who’s tweeted outrage and #JeSuis hashtags over the Charlie Hebdo assassinations, and who himself had this to say about Julian Assange:

    “If the Met want to regain my trust they should drag Assange out the embassy + shoot him in the back of the head in Traf Square”

    and

    “It’s cool to imagine Assange as a Spartacus figure cuz that means he’s going to get forcibly nailed to a bit of wood at some point”

    After these tweets, the BBC hired Thom Phipps to write a comedy called Asylum, billed as “a satirical comedy about a government whistleblower and a millionaire internet entrepreneur trapped together in a London embassy.”

    I guess at least the BBC is only aiming to indulge its taste for character assassination of journalists, not like FoxNews, who openly advocated for the real thing:

    Bob Beckel Wants Julian Assange Assassinated!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d36xEvVnF2I

    Not to be outdone on the hypocrisy scale, David Cameron waffled “we should never give up the values that we believe in and defend as part of our democracy and civilisation and believing in a free press, in freedom of expression, in the right of people to write and say what they believe” while spending almost £10 million to keep editor and political refugee Julian Assange – an uncharged man, therefore presumed innocent – from travelling to enjoy the political asylum he’s been granted:
    http://rt.com/uk/220655-extortionate-cost-safeguarding-assange/

    Or, speaking of Terrorism & Nuance, did you catch the use of the word “legitimate” in the White House statement:

    “There is no legitimate act of journalism, however offensive some people might find it, that justifies an act of violence,”
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/01/07/252316_suspects-in-paris-terror-attack.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

    There’s “illegitimate” acts of journalism that they think do? Ahh yes, of course there are – we’ve all heard the excuses made for the deaths of two journalists shown in Collateral Murder. Hanging out with known “insurgents” in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and of the wrong colour. They had it coming!

    But nothing, to me, speaks louder about “free speech” US-style (and in our own beloved Isle too, mind you) than Tarek Mehanna’s sentencing statement after he was convicted of “material support for terrorism” and given 17 years’ prison time merely for translating jihadi texts from Arabic into English. The irony that such a powerful and eloquent act of “free speech” was permitted only after he had already been consigned to a SuperMax black hole breaks my heart. Well worth a read.

    http://www.salon.com/2012/04/13/the_real_criminals_in_the_tarek_mehanna_case/

  • YouKnowMyName

    France isn’t a regime, it’s a nice country. Commandos of whatever origin shouting ‘nominative $deity elative $adjective’ at a atrocity will just increase the possibility to get alleged xenophobes like FN elected in France, LN Italy, ‘kippers in GB etc., and mathematically speaking, Marine is very privileged (approximately)

    population of EU in 2013 (742500000) / No. of MEPs in 2014 (751) puts her amongst the top 0.0001% of the EU elite, or am I wrong?

    p.s. Did BNP Paribas ever get around to paying the US $8.9billion ‘fine’ yet, or is that not related to the warship delay, other than being linked in this old July 2014 Wall Street journal article

  • Bert

    Mary,

    Re a UK attack highly likely – Trip & Onions indeed.

    Look at the case of Thomas Lund Lack who was charged & convicted under the Official Secrets Act in relation to leaking a counter-terrorism report to a Sunday Times journalist.

    Mr Lund Lack was a Met police employee who in April 2007 leaked the report compiled by the Mi5 Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) which stated that al-Qaeda leaders were planning UK terror attacks… to coincide with the stepping down of Prime Minister Tony Blair.

    Gordon Brown became Prime Minister on 27th June 2007 & whatdy’know, the ‘Tiger/Tiger’/’Glasgow Airport Terror Attacks’ occurred 2 days later!

    Some coinkydence!

  • oddie

    not-so-free press –

    Telegraph: Paris Charlie Hebdo attack: live
    09.52 ….Press have been moved far away from the scene, to a hill on a roundabout a few kilometres away from the complex. We can’t see anything due to the fog, which means visibility is about 300m. There are about 100 journalists standing here…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11329976/Paris-Charlie-Hebdo-attack-live.html?frame=3159254

    LIVE: French police corner Kouachi brothers
    13:35 – BREAKING – New shooting linked to second Paris gunman
    Various reports say a new shooting and hostage taking in the south east of Paris today is linked to a man named as Amedy C. who is believed to be the gunman who shot and killed trainee police officer Clarissa Jean-Philippe in Montrouge yesterday.
    We are hearing reports that one person is injured, though that is unconfirmed.
    An armed man had taken a hostage at a kosher grocery store, a source told AFP.
    13:33 – BREAKING – Shooting in Porte de Vincennes today
    French Raquel Garrido, an MP, tweets that “police in bullet proof wests are evacuating everyone. Operation under way.”…
    http://www.thelocal.fr/20150109/live-charlie-hebdo-france-gunmen-kouachi

1 9 10 11 12 13 32

Comments are closed.