 |
| Translation -- we must veil Charlie Hebdo |
The words that Charlie Hebdo editor Stephane "Charb" Charbonnier offered in the aftermath of a previous attack are fitting:
"I don't have kids, no wife, no car, no credit," he told Le Monde. "Maybe it's a little pompous to say, but I'd rather die standing than live on my knees."I don't know if Charbonnier was actually standing when the murderers came, but we have learned where he stood. His words were only pompous in the context of an intellectual class that has no problem being on its knees.
And I would be remiss if I didn't note the comments of William Donohue, who claims to defend the Catholic Church from its critics:
Killing in response to insult, no matter how gross, must be unequivocally condemned. That is why what happened in Paris cannot be tolerated. But neither should we tolerate the kind of intolerance that provoked this violent reaction.So Charbonnier had it coming, apparently. Mr. Donohue, you don't speak for me.
Those who work at this newspaper have a long and disgusting record of going way beyond the mere lampooning of public figures, and this is especially true of their depictions of religious figures. For example, they have shown nuns masturbating and popes wearing condoms. They have also shown Muhammad in pornographic poses....
Stephane Charbonnier, the paper’s publisher, was killed today in the slaughter. It is too bad that he didn’t understand the role he played in his tragic death. In 2012, when asked why he insults Muslims, he said, “Muhammad isn’t sacred to me.” Had he not been so narcissistic, he may still be alive. Muhammad isn’t sacred to me, either, but it would never occur to me to deliberately insult Muslims by trashing him..
2 comments:
from what i've read, the Charlie mag wasnt doing much in the form of intellectual debate in the first place and existed mainly to push buttons and offend.
all that is fine and good. freedom of expression and all...
BUT, when you repeatedly grab the tiger's tail for the sole purpose of pissing him off, that does kinda change the sympathy equation for me.
not saying they 'had it coming'... i do not support or endorse resorting to murder in cases like this. but there is such a thing as asking for it.
now, just what higher moral or social cause were they advocating again? and was it worth it? i hope their loved ones think so.
now, lets go get the rest of the muslim assassins, because they have a little something coming to them too.
not saying they 'had it coming'... i do not support or endorse resorting to murder in cases like this. but there is such a thing as asking for it.
Understood.
now, just what higher moral or social cause were they advocating again? and was it worth it? i hope their loved ones think so.
I suspect they weren't advocating any higher moral or social cause. Not sure they had any responsibility to do so, either. We have plenty of other people to handle the moral teaching beat.
In the case of Charbonnier, he indicated that he didn't have any loved ones -- the "I have no kids, no wife, no car, no credit" business in the post. Some of the others might have. Don't know. What I do suspect is that they weren't looking for sympathy.
And I make a distinction between your concerns and Donohue's because you aren't purporting to speak for anyone other than yourself. I'm cool with what you believe. Donohue claims to speak for Catholics. To repeat, he does not speak for me.
Post a Comment