Why I'm not Charlie and never will be

Jason? You don't believe they have what right?

That was your name right?

Right to draw such things

#JesuisCharlie is not about whether or not you like their cartoons or whether you are offended by them. Its about supporting their right to freedom of speech and freedom of speech in general after it has been directly and violently attacked.

No, its Jacob.

You think you have the right not to be offended? Or that Muslims do? Or that everyone does? Only people whom you choose?

Ah, Jacob then.

I believe Charlie Hebdo had no right to draw some of the things they did. Most of the things I've seen were pointless and unnecessary. If they drew similar things against e.g. Hindus , I would still be against them. They have drawn things about other religions but I haven't seen them yet so can't comment.

If you're gna try to preach this western ideal of freedom of speech, then you might as well stop quoting me.

Ah, Jacob then.

I believe Charlie Hebdo had no right to draw some of the things they did. Most of the things I've seen were pointless and unnecessary. If they drew similar things against e.g. Hindus , I would still be against them. They have drawn things about other religions but I haven't seen them yet so can't comment.

If you're gna try to preach this western ideal of freedom of speech, then you might as well stop quoting me.

This is exactly what the media wants you to believe, the French and the west are building it as some basic murder because of a cartoon. 50 years ago we did not see mass murders like this from Islamist groups. Ask yourself why that has changed

I also do not think 'Islamofascist' is that accurate a description really. What really was the motivation? Anti-faith and anti-minority propaganda has always been a feature of the media in Europe.

Hamza is predictably involved, as are IS, but context specific it is obviously Algeria that should be looked into to get to the crux of the matter. Algeria originally had a moderate and idealistic Islamic (and fundamentalist) democratic movement that was beaten down with great brutality. This movement opposed the tyranny of a French puppet government in Algeria, and the brutality suffered by them was the worst of any country in the world. Think China, as the western press often likes to slate for their human rights abuses, but worse.

Now, with that known, is it at all a surprise that young lads from the banlieue with little respect and social mobility/prospects in a France which practices widespread public contempt and hate for their religion, are a bit angry? (whilst being fully aware of the history of their country/relatives).

There is a lot of wilful ignorance in the French press that prefers to forget their imperialistic oppression and choose to permit extreme attacks on Muslim beliefs as an everyday facet of life. Yeah, they're free to express it. But is that right? To view this as simply a war between high-minded elite 'western enlightenment' and some sort of brutal fascist medieval bloodcult is to totally miss the point and to wilfully ignore the west's part in having developed the crisis.

Of course they are totally guilty and responsible for the crime itself. However one of the brothers was described as the sort that would not do this type of thing, a kind and sweet man. But stranger things have happened in the past to get someone so riled that they become radicalised and responsive to messages of hate and violence. I am not saying what he did was justified, but I think there is a bigger background to this than the message we're being sold by Murdoch/French media and co. We are being sold the French propaganda message, it's all about their liberty and equality vs medieval evil. But it is not all that , at all. It is a gross oversimplification.
It's at least partly about the recent legacy of European colonialism in Africa and the Middle East (call it imperial hangover) and at least partly about the French role in it and the refusal of France to address these things.

These guys are cannon fodder for every fanatic with a believable message aimed at giving them a sense of belonging and fuelling that anger/desire to put things 'right'. It could have been a cartoon, it could have been a government building, it could have been a plane, a subway train. Next time, they could be killing people because they don't like how they're discriminating against Muslims for X/Y/Z.

This is not just some isolated incident and to treat it as such is why the west will continue failing to deal with the actual problem.

And here we go:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ahmed-coulibaly-isis-video-footage-shows-paris-supermarket-gunman-pledging-allegiance-to-islamic-state-9970600.html

I do not make fun of massacres.

I believe Charlie Hebdo had no right to draw some of the things they did. Most of the things I've seen were pointless and unnecessary.

I don't care if he pledges allegiance to IS.

If I pledged allegiance to IS, that does then mean I am part of IS.

Yes, it does, especially if you kill innocent people in the name of IS and your wife escapes to IS land to be with IS.

Yes, it does, especially if you kill innocent people in the name of IS and your wife escapes to IS land to be with IS.

I pledge allegiance to IS then.

Aaaand this had nothing to do with Charlie Hebdo and is a whole other topic.

IS are a specific group not an ideology.

If you claim to be a member of the Third Reich that does not make you a member.

If you declare yourself to be a neo-nazi, then that makes you one.

I suppose then that this wife that has fled to Syria is being protected by the lizard men right? They are members by their actions. It is not like joining them is akin to an Oxbridge application.

If you're gna try to preach this western ideal of freedom of speech, then you might as well stop quoting me.

Ah, the same Western ideal of freedom of speech that is allowing you to post on this very forum? Or the same Western ideal of freedom of speech that let you call France a "douchebag country" in a post the other day?