Several weeks have already passed from the horrific Muslim terrorist attack against the staff of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Yet the event, which was initially branded the French 9/11, was quickly sanitized by the European media and the hapless politicians of the European Union and turned into a wishy-washy fest of imaginary multicultural tolerance, from which the only lesson they could derive was that only the empathic acceptance of every culture (no matter how bizarre its nature is) could assure the social harmony.
For starters, every justice defender headed toward the most powerful weapon for making social change and fighting injustice – Twitter. Passionate do-gooders came up with a new “powerful” hashtag – #JeSuisCharlie – to fight the terror. Typing feverishly on their iPhones and computers from the comfort of their warm rooms, the new warriors spread hundreds of thousands of useless 140-letter messages “confronting” the extremist evil.
Twitter is a symptom of the deterioration of our civilization – created as a tool to write short messages, it was quickly appropriated by the social cowards, who are too dumb to engage in a detailed discussion or too scared to face a danger face to face, but still can feel morally superiority over the rest of us because they retweet the right hashtag. They do all that while the Muslim barbarians are killing thousands of Christians and other people they don’t like. Should bringing Twitter awareness to the Muslim world be the next EU project? (Do you remember the hashtag campaign to free the kidnapped Nigerian girls, in which even Mouchelle Obama took part? It surely terrified Boko Haram… not).
At the same time, almost none of the mainstream media outlets re-published Old Mo’s cartoons from Charlie Hebdo. They gave a variety of reasons for having cold feet, from respect for Islam to artistic reasons (seeing the drawings as tasteless), but the sad truth was that they were scared shitless of the Muslim savages, who could go after them with automatic weapons, instead of registering their indignation in 140-letter messages with the correct hashtags.
Another farcical element of the “resistance against extremism” was the demonstration led by the world leaders in Paris. It turned out that the only honest guy, who didn’t want to participate in that farce, was Barry Obama, who preferred to play golf with his sweetheart Reggie Love. And (unintentionally) he was right – nothing came out of that theatrical event. Leaders like Hollande and Merkel kept insisting that the Paris massacre, committed under the battle cry “Allahu Akbar,” had nothing to do with Islam. They preferred to keep their eyes closed until the next attack. The fact that they invited among them the old PLO terrorist Mahmoud Abbas speaks for itself – his organization and “government” are still actively involved in terrorism against Israel. At the same time they felt uneasy having Netanyahu at the event, even though Israel is the only country actively and consistently fighting terrorism in the Middle East.
The always helpful media presented the leaders as leading a massive demonstration of hundreds of thousands of people. The photos published everywhere didn’t leave any doubt about that.
However, other pictures, though not so widely promoted, showed that from a different angle the march didn’t look that epic at all.
That picture is much more believable – a row of statesmen (and the occasional stateswoman) followed by a modest crowd. I bet you that everyone in the crowd is somehow employed in the personal security business or is from the police and the whole photo-op was on a street, where the traffic had been stopped hours in advance and every window of every apartment secured. Nothing displays better the animal fear of Europe’s elites than this charade – the people, who are supposed to fight the Muslim danger, on one hand vigorously deny its existence, but on the other hand still take all necessary precautions during their demonstration of fake courage.
Unlike the cowards, who lead Europe, the journalists of Charlie Hebdo had neither the finances nor the desire to protect themselves from an attack. It has already been written a lot about their courage to confront and ridicule any social and political issue; many have noted the fact that the magazine was an equal-opportunity offender.
I have no problem with that, but when you verbally attack everything with the idea that there is nothing sacred worth defending, except the right to attack and ridicule, you often destroy the society and its ability to defend your right to attack. The reproductions of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons floating in the internet paint a curious picture of the magazine’s positions.
Charlie Hebdo is unapologetically leftist and that’s not unique among the satirists, but they go one step further by daring to make fun of Islam, which is a line the normal lefties won’t cross – after all, Islam is their imaginary ally in the fight against the world imperialism. However, the way they ridicule Islam – by just depicting the “prophet” – is very mild compared to what they say about the other religions. Here is a view on Judaism:
This isn’t like the naked Mo, right? A cartoon like this could fit in any Muslim anti-Semitic publication. The context is not clear, but I could hardly see anything more offensive than showing an Orthodox Jew embraced in almost erotic hug and kiss with an SS officer at the entrance of Auschwitz (as the concentration camp’s logo – “Arbeit macht frei” – shows).
Christianity doesn’t get away easy, either. In a disgusting cartoon ridiculing the Holy Trinity our brave satirists depict the God Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit engaged in a homosexual threesome.
No matter how offensive the image is, one thing is clear – Christians won’t go on a killing spree over the cartoon. Through its more than 2,000 years of history, Christianity has been through much worse than a few blasphemous cartoons by anarchist lefties and it still has survived. The problems begin when those lefties try to push Christianity out of the society whose moral foundations it helped establish.
I am not sure what the moral views of Charlie Hebdo are, other than the desire to eliminate morality. The reality is that people can’t live without some guiding principles in their everyday life. When you destroy the foundations of a civilization and people feel lost, the most violent and pushy doctrines fill the vacuum. In Charlie Hebdo’s world concepts as homeland, nation, and patriotism are dirty words. If the magazine’s position is taken seriously, people will lose their will to resist the well-organized Muslim menace, which is sweeping Europe.
The leftist positions of the magazine were clearly expressed in their fight on behalf of the socialist candidate Francois Hollande during the last presidential election in France. In a series about the ten reasons why Sarkozy must be defeated, they opposed his “austerity” plans:
They didn’t forget to attack Marine Le Pen – showing her as the Gorgon Medusa whom for some strange reason Sarkozy may appoint a minister of the environment. And we are expected to believe that she would destroy that environment (as opposed to the green socialist schemes, which are the real disaster).
And after Hollande won, Charlie Hebdo put him on the cover engaged in the highly humane activity of grinding Sarkozy’s head. Never mind that Hollande turned out to be one of the most unpopular socialist presidents of France (and most of them are socialists). In his half-assed attempts to save the dying welfare state and its main beneficiaries, the parasitic trade unions, he failed miserably and even his own supporters were upset with him.
In that imaginary socialist world Charlie Hebdo miscalculated the Muslims, seeing them as easy-going victims of the evil state. In the series against Sarkozy, they didn’t miss the chance to mock his immigration policies, which supposedly targeted unfairly the Muslims (I wish the statement were true, Sarkozy should’ve stopped Muslim immigration).
This cartoon deserves a separate post, because it was drawn by none other but Georges Wolinski, one of the victims of the Muslim terrorist attack against the magazine. As you can see, Monsieur Wolinski had no problem with admitting backward fanatical Muslims into France – and the consequences of that policy are already painfully visible.
And in case you thought that the staff of Charlie Hebdo saw the danger of Islam, you will be quickly disproved by cartoons expressing their bland and widely-held position of the average Western coward that the terrorist crimes of Islam have nothing to do with Islam.
It’s all ISIS’s fault – the pure Islam has nothing to do with the atrocities. They would behead even their “prophet” despite his protests and the only reaction is that he is asked to shut up. I am not sure if the cartoonists believed their own crap, but it is hard to avoid the fact, after observing their activities, that they go out of their way to make sure everything complies with the original pure form of Islam. Old Mo’s cult started as a brutal gang, which exterminated and beheaded any opponents, who thought he was out of his mind.
The position on Islam is curiously shared by the “rebellious” Charlie Hebdo and the cowardly European politicians – although we are faced with a vicious enemy, which tries to destroy us, both of them are simply not willing to name it, let alone start a fight against it.
But the resemblance ends here – unlike the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, the politicians are well-equipped to protect themselves (with our own money). The cartoonists are not – and they ended up with Muslim bullets in their bodies.
Despite the importance of the free speech issue, it is difficult to feel compassion for those who want to exercise it, but feel obligated to undermine the very society, which guarantees that right, and ridicule and mock those, who confront the forces (like Islam) which want to turn our world into a sharia-compliant hell with no place for Charlie Hebdo’s satire.
Sorry, Charlie, but I am not you…
© 2015 Blogwrath.com