Rest in Peace, Ahmed

@Olivier5,

The lack of respect for victims is despicable. I welcome a discussion on the excesses and errors of Charlie Hebdo -- actually it would be an important discussion because the "freedom of expression" angle is only one aspect -- but I won't be part of an A2K mob frenzy, thank you.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Sugar coating the truth is something satirists have always railed against.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

What I want to know is: among those London commuters who died in terrorist attacks a few years back, how many of them can we slander just for the fun of it?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

I've not slandered anyone. What have I said other than they printed those pictures? And, they did set out to deliberately provoke. How is printing a picture of Mohammed's arsehole helping anyone? Compare that to Jesus and Mo, which also depicts Mohammed, but has a lot of moderate Moslems arguing for it.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

You quoted a cartoon without its caption, and thus out of context. You jumped to conclusions about its meaning, arguing that a newspaper you have never ever read in your entire life--and that just fell victim of a terrorist attack--was racist. That's called being an asshole.

Quote:

As you will see, someone in the Twitterverse has cited the image as an example of racism and has blasted it out under #JeNeSuisPasCharlie. The image shows a cartoon depicting Justice Minister Christiane Taubira, who was born in French Guiana, as a monkey. An open an shut case of racism, right? Actually, au contraire.

There are a number of glaring problems with the claim that this anti-racist cartoon is actually pro-racist. First, note that it is drawn by Charb himself. As mentioned in the beginning, his girlfriend was of North African decent and is also chair of the French Equal Opportunities and Anti-Discrimination Commission. So, it might seem a little strange for him to be promoting a racist image.

Second, look at what the text says: "Rassemblement Bleu Raciste." This is a parody of the slogan "Rassemblement Bleu Marine," which is used by Marine Le Pen's Front National. Also notice the tricolor flame next to the image. That is a mock up of the party's logo.

This cartoon came out following a controversy in which a politician from Front National shared a photoshopped image on Facebook that showed the Justice Minister as a monkey. The Charlie cartoon is doing a parody of this and saying Front National is racist. Ironically, some people outside of France are using it to say Charlie Hebdo is racist.

More: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/11/1356945/-On-not-understanding-Charlie-Why-many-smart-people-are-getting-it-wrong#

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

There's far better ways of attacking racism than by drawing a picture of someone as a monkey. I can't see how drawing a black woman as a monkey can do anything other than compound the insult.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

There are many things you don't see. Satire à la française is more complex than it seems. Most of the time, it expresses itself in an ironic mode, saying the opposite of what is meant. It takes a good knowledge of the culture and the context to understand. Taubira gets it. She made a very touching speech at the burial ceremony of one of the CH cartoonist. She called his drawings "magical, very very subtle". I posted a link to that speech upthread. It's a typical example of her delivery: human, smart, real. The opposite of you.

You clearly failed to understand anything, jumped to conclusions, and helped spread the kind of baseless hatred that played a role in this tragedy. But that helped you score a few brownie points here. Well done!

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

What would you call showing a picture of Mohammed's arsehole then? Complex satire?

One thing that was pointed out about French satire is that it doesn't ridicule politicians and people in power any way near as much as its British counterpart.
Will Self understands quite a lot of things, including satire.

Quote:

Let me be clear: the people responsible for murdering the journalists at the offices of Charlie Hebdo on January 7th were the men who pulled the triggers of the Kalashnikovs aimed at them. Moreover, we've no need to reach into our grab-bag of ethical epithets in order to find one that fits these men's characters; we don't need to speak of "barbarism", or a "complete lack of civilised values", or agonise about how they became radicalised – because we know the answer already – but what we can unequivocally assert is that these men, in those rattling, coughing, cordite-stinking moments, were evil. If by evil is understood this: an egotism that grew like a cancer – a lust for status and power and "significance" which metastasised through these murderers' brains. The problem for the staunch defenders of Western values is that each and every one of us possesses this capacity for evil – it's implicit in having an ego at all; so when the demonstrators stood in the Place de la Republique holding placards that read "JE SUIS CHARLIE", they might just as well have held ones reading: "NOUS SOMMES LES TERRORISTES".

The memorial issue of Charlie Hebdo will have a print run of 1,000,000 copies, financed by the French government; so, now the satirists have been co-opted by the state, precisely the institution you might've thought they should never cease from attacking. But the question needs to be asked: were the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo really satirists, if by satire is meant the deployment of humour, ridicule, sarcasm and irony in order to achieve moral reform? Well, when the issue came up of the Danish cartoons I observed that the test I apply to something to see whether it truly is satire derives from HL Mencken's definition of good journalism: it should "afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted". The trouble with a lot of so-called "satire" directed against religiously-motivated extremists is that it's not clear who it's afflicting, or who it's comforting.

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/will-self-charlie-hebdo-attack-the-west-satire-france-terror-105

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

That's truly great. Let's all spread hatred, misunderstanding and confusion on the eve of a terrorist attack.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

I welcome a discussion on the excesses and errors of Charlie Hebdo -- actually it would be an important discussion because the "freedom of expression" angle is only one aspect -- but I won't be part of an A2K mob frenzy, thank you.

I'm glad you posted the above, O5, as it's given me time to reflect. "Freedom is not free" and it's had to be paid for the hard way. We're lucky, here in the west where one is free to speak their mind without fear of repercussion; however, when it comes to stepping over the line, that's another scenario; what's so terribly wrong in bending a little to respect others' religious culture? If we ludicrously exaggerate the peculiarities or defects of different religions or persons in another culture, not our own, then we're opening ourselves up to some dire consequences. It's not so much the case we might be attacked for doing so, but a matter of conforming to accepted standards of morality and respectability. I have never read any of the contents from the French weekly magazine "Charlie Hebdo"––––– only learned of its existence since the French attacks; however, once reading the article posted by Lustig Andrei yesterday, I was given pause. Even though ordinary law abiding Muslims were against the terrorists act in France, these same people were very discomforted by the satirist magazine depiction of their religion.

In my humble opinion, I believe "freedom of speech" should be tempered when it comes to deriding and or criticizing other cultures by means of satire.

1 Reply

@Moment-in-Time,

Thanks. There a lot to disagree with in CH's approach. As I said, I am fine with such a discussion as long as it remains intellectually honest. If this is about blaming the victims or calling them names without making a serious effort to understand the issues, or worse still, scoring A2K brownie points by slandering them, I'd rather not participate. There's only so much disgust I can manage.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

The eve of a terrorist attack? Do you know something?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

I don't remember on what thread I said what, probably this one since I started it, that I'm not prone to poking people for their religion, as I remember having one and being rather wound up in it.
I meant that I don't much care where people are on the spectrum of religious beliefs or not having those.

I care if beliefs are imposed, and we have examples all over the place of ideology imposed in and by many quarters. On that, I am all out for freedom of cartooning. You don't like it, don't read it. Make your own cartoons.

Oh, wait, some people can't draw humans (do I have that correct? not sure).

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Please start another thread on that.

0 Replies

Could we bring this back to Ahmed, please? The thread is about him,

Do any of you know more?

I happen to be reading a non fiction book by a New York City policeman that has engaged me right away about his daily life and much more. Excellent so far, and I'm picky.
I would like to know more about Ahmed.
All I really know now is that he died in service and had a wonderful face.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

I don't remember on what thread I said what, probably this one since I started it, that I'm not prone to poking people for their religion, as I remember having one and being rather wound up in it.

I agree it's often childish. I don't see the point in many case. (I'm an atheist and ex-believer too) BUT when well done, it can be hilarious, brilliant and useful. Voltaire. Life of Brian. Thomas Paine...

In the case of CH, i support their right to draw and say whatever they want, even if I disagreed with what I see as their own fanatism. There is a strange, disturbing parallel here between on the one hand Charlie's extreme, dare-devil, revolutionary political attitude and work and even their ultimate death as 'martyrs of press freedom', and on the other hand the radical Islamists who killed them and died as 'martyrs of Islam' under police fire. That disturbs me.

I gathered that they received so many death threats that it hardened their stance progressively. Their started a well known process of upping the ante when opposed. They engaged the opponent. They did not take the death threats as seriously as they should have, perhaps. They let the opponent push them into an escalation.

If someone HATES drawings of, say, apples, i am not going to stop drawing apples just so he doesn't throw a tantrum, right? But by the same token I shouldn't draw MORE AND MORE apples just to irk the other guy.

Quote:

Oh, wait, some people can't draw humans (do I have that correct? not sure).

No muslim scripture forbid drawing but sunnis since the 16th century have banned representing the prophet and even all representation.

That's an important factor to understand Charlie' outrageous stance. In short, a proud graphic artist cannot have respect for people who ban drawing. Cabu in particular insisted on this point. Cabu is what you guys call a cartoonist, and what we call a 'dessinateur' = 'drawer'. Drawing was all his life. He made on average a thousands drawings a day, it has been said. He was the best of them all, of course. None of the other victims were half as good but for them all, drawing was central to their identity, and they just could not stomach that a religion would not only DARE to tell them what to draw or not draw, but also and more fundamentally DARE TO FORBID THEIR PROFESSION. Total cultural clash.

The French anti-clerical tradition is long and honored. This is a major cultural difference. We want to protect that. One of its most illustrious hero is Brassens, who as we say 'ate priests' ('bouffer du curé') all his life. But he also sung "Mourir Pour Des Idées" which gently mocks people who want to die for an idea.

Cartoonists should not be willing to die to make us laugh. We don't deserve nor ask such sacrifice. Which is why CH now MUST CHANGE. This issue is the last one with this defiant tone. The Charlie we knew, the careless, hold-no-barrels dare-devil Charlie Hebdo is dead. Simply put, it won't be funny anymore.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

quoting,

In the case of CH, i support their right to draw and say whatever they want, even if I disagreed with what I see as their own fanatism. There is a strange, disturbing parallel here between on the one hand Charlie's extreme, dare-devil, revolutionary political attitude and work and even their ultimate death as 'martyrs of press freedom', and on the other hand the radical Islamists who killed them and died as 'martyrs of Islam' under police fire. That disturbs me.

me, nod

me, I'll say martyr theater - we were all mostly raised on it, I certainly was, whatever side of whatever aisles.

2 Replies

@ossobuco,

When Will Self and Martin Rawson were being interviewed on Channel 4 they said pretty much the same thing.

An appeal for total free speech which is an abstract concept is no different from an appeal to the Bible, Koran, Torah etc.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Cartoonists should not be willing to die to make us laugh.

Happy Friday morning, 05.

Ah, your above statement is one of the most salient points you've suggested and it's made quite an impression on me.

The post is a most logical one, because as you subtly infer, NOT all caricatures should be done away with or else life would lose so much of its entertainment value ––– "no one should have to lose their life because of satire." Some things in life are more sacred to us than others, like one's religious faith. Congruent with an earlier statement, I, also am an "ex-believer," and today stand as an avowed atheist. So many among us continue to venerate a deity, that to their way of thinking it is painfully sacrilegious when hearing jokes about same; then there are the un-thinking extremists incapable of elemental thought who carry their anger and vengeance to new heights when hearing their Faith is being denounced and or ridiculed. To kill all these people because of words they wrote borders on madness! Yesterday, I heard on TV that the Dutch Mayor was so incensed at the killings that he told the Muslim community if you don't like western ways then pack your bags and "F*ck off!" To my surprise for one moment I found myself in complete agreement with him. And then came to my senses because most Muslims are citizens of their respective communities, and they have rights, and they did not do the filthy deed of murder! Most ordinary Muslims are just as horrified and fearful they will be blamed for what the freaks did.

My point is and always has been is to respect other people's religious beliefs, like when I was religious I was hurt if someone jeered me and they did just that when I was in my early teens –––– at school kids are frequently cruel....it never entered my head to strike back physically; yet killing another as we have seen, occurs quite often.

I respect Muslims right to their religion except when they pervert it to satisfy some deeper need to inflict punishment on others. If there is to be a change among these religious fanatics it would have to come from within because evolvement simply cannot be imposed.

0 Replies

Ahmed Merabet, the policeman killed in the attack on Charlie, was a man "good and just"

Flowers at the precinct and mobilization on Twitter: spontaneous tributes spread in memory of Ahmed Merabet, the officer described as "good and just" by his friends, and killed in cold blood in the attack against Charlie Hebdo.

At the police eleventh district precinct where Ahmed Merabet worked, passersby came in silence Friday morning to drop a rose or a bouquet, almost always white, in makeshift vases installed on the porch. A woman stops and signs herself. A man leaves a message in the condolence book.

[...] "The true Muslim [in this event] is the one in uniform who sought to protect his fellow citizens," insists Pascal Popelin, the MP for Seine Saint-Denis, who had the opportunity to meet Ahmed Merabet in 2006.

"I was struck by how extremely motivated and passionate this young man was, really wanting to become a police officer and to serve his country," he added.

Merabet Ahmed had just passed his habilitation for police officer. He began his service in Seine Saint-Denis, according to an SGP-FO trade unionist. He himself was a trade union delegate.

At Livry-Gargan (Seine-Saint-Denis), where he lived, family and friends walked Thursday night to the entrance of the family house, where a white tent had been set up. Candles at the window sills of the neighboring houses illuminated the entire street.

"We lost a friend, the guy with whom we grew up," said one of his friends. "He was primarily French and that's the most important. Ahmed was good and just, he died doing his job. We still do not understand how that's possible."

Described in the media as "voluntary", "discrete" or "conscientious", Ahmed Merabet "grew up here. His family has been there for a long time, everyone is shocked," according to Pierre-Yves Martin, the UMP mayor.

Friends also said they were very shocked by the video of the death of the policeman. "It is indecent to show that," said one of his relatives, while calls to remove the video on Twitter multiplied. [...]

Original article
http://www.lepoint.fr/societe/ahmed-merabet-le-policier-abattu-dans-l-attaque-de-charlie-un-homme-bon-et-juste-09-01-2015-1895249_23.php

(More tomorrow)

0 Replies

Rest in Peace, Ahmed

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know