January 08, 2015

On The Charlie Hebdo Terrorist Attack

Yesterday as I prepared for work, I heard the news of a terrorist attack on a French magazine. My heart immediately fell, for I knew without hearing any further details which magazine had been attacked. I turned and looked at my wife and sadly said that I knew which publication it had been – that it would be the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. Within the next few minutes my belief was confirmed, and in the hours that followed I learned of the deaths of these martyrs for the liberties that undergird Western Civilization.

Why Charlie Hebdo? Why attack a magazine noted for its humor and its satirization of political, social, and religious leaders and institutions? I knew the answer yesterday, but today the world knows – because the magazine regularly violated the norms of Islam by not only publishing pictures of the faith’s putative prophet, Muhammad, but also by doing so in a manner that was frankly disrespectful. Islam was not the magazine’s sole target, but it was the only one to respond with violence – with riots around the world when it republished the Dutch Muhammad cartoons, with a firebombing in 2011, and with yesterday’s murderous attack that left a ten members of the staff dead, including the magazine’s publisher and four of its cartoonists, as well as two police officers (one of them himself a Muslim).

But let’s not make any mistake here. While this was an attack on one magazine that violated the religious strictures of Islam, that magazine was not the main target. The real target was our Western tradition of religious freedom and freedom of expression. What was actually under attack was our sense that we can safely express beliefs contrary to the orthodoxy of the most extreme and violent adherents of a primitive religion that is built on force, fear and intimidation which coerce submission rather than a solid faith that its teachings are self-evidently true and worthy of being followed voluntarily.

Lest one think that my assessment of Islam is unfair, let us consider the words of Islamic cleric Anjem Choudary as they appeared in USA today in the hours following the assassination of the ten journalists and two police officers in Paris.

Contrary to popular misconception, Islam does not mean peace but rather means submission to the commands of Allah alone. Therefore, Muslims do not believe in the concept of freedom of expression, as their speech and actions are determined by divine revelation and not based on people's desires.

The freedoms that are taken for granted in the Western world – freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion -- are incompatible with Islam. Choudary goes on to make it clear that he believes that governments must limit the freedoms of their citizens to no more than those which Islam will tolerate or both government sand citizens will face the ire – and violent retaliation – of offended Muslims.

Sadly, too many of the opinion leaders in the political class and the commentariat have fallen short in their response to this dastardly act of Islamic terrorism. For example, CNN still will not show the images that the terrorists deem to be the “provocation” for their despicable deeds. The New York Times has taken the opportunity of the attack to express its concern that opposition to Islam – not terrorism directed against those who exercise fundamental human rights – will increase in the wake of the murders. Former Democrat presidential candidate and party chairman Howard Dean insisted that we not label as Muslims those who commit terrorism in defense of the honor of Muhammad while shouting “Allahu Akbar” – apparently because he knows better than Choudary what constitutes the proper interpretation of Islam. Similarly, Tony Barber of the Financial Times seemed more comfortable condemning the victims than their killers, calling the decision to speak and publish freely “stupid” because doing so constitute a provocation to angry Muslims who do not believe in freedom of speech, press or religion – though in his defense, Barber did not quite go so far as Choudary in asserting that the dead had it coming for having dared to exercise their freedom in a way that offended the terrorists. And while President Obama did issue a tepid statement condemning the attack, the words “Muslim”. “Islam, “jihad”, and “sharia” were notably absent – in sharp contrast to his administration’s 2012 statement that condemned the decision of Charlie Hebdo to publish cartoon’s that sparked riots in the Muslim world and the president’s post-Benghazi declaration that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” by making films or publishing words or cartoons that offend Muslims. While none of these unworthy opinion leaders were saying that the dead in Paris had it coming like Choudary, they and others of their ilk were not willing to stand up and condemn that which was the true motive for these reprehensible murders – the cancerous notion that restrictions found in sharia law must be followed even by non-believers and enforced by governments even in countries where Muslims are a minority lest death and destruction be rained down upon those who choose freedom over the submission to oppressive Quranic decrees.

Choudary concludes his polemic with the following declaration.

It is time that the sanctity of a Prophet revered by up to one-quarter of the world's population was protected.

Consider the implications of that demand.

Speaking for myself, I find the notion of living in a society that Anjem Choudary and his ilk seek to impose is intolerable. But unlike them, I’m not going to seek to kill over the mere expression of an idea that I find offensive. I will, on the other hand, fight against the elimination of fundamental liberties that they insist is required to show respect to them and their false religion. I will not, for fear of the terroristic impulses of the extremists in the Muslim community, remain silent or refrain from commenting upon and criticizing a faith that has sadly become the greatest force for evil facing civilization today. I will not surrender my liberty because the barbaric followers of a delusional seventh-century used camel salesman demand that I do so. It is to them that I send the following message.


|| Greg, 05:12 PM || Permalink || Comments (3) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Trackback Information for On The Charlie Hebdo Terrorist Attack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'On The Charlie Hebdo Terrorist Attack'.

Comments on On The Charlie Hebdo Terrorist Attack

At least Obama did not call this another case of workplace violence as he did with Fort Hood. I wonder if he will send a letter of congratulations to the mosque these murderers attended (as with the Moore, Oklahoma beheader).

|| Posted by Mark, January 9, 2015 07:57 AM ||

Non. Charlie Hebdo n'est pas mort. Vive la Charlie Hebdo!

|| Posted by Mark, January 9, 2015 10:42 AM ||

Rhymes With Right - On The Charlie Hebdo Terrorist Attack

|| Posted by ttqsnozml, February 19, 2017 07:30 AM ||
Post a comment

Remember personal info?




Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards
Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2013 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2012 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2011 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2010 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2009 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Posts by Category

Abortion (posts: 2)
Announcements (posts: 13)
Blogging (posts: 187)
Border Issues & Immigration (posts: 421)
deferred (posts: 4)
Education (posts: 685)
Entertainment & Sports (posts: 483)
Guns & Gun Control (posts: 65)
History (posts: 329)
Humor (posts: 88)
Israel/Middle East (posts: 44)
Medical News (posts: 54)
Military (posts: 273)
News (posts: 1571)
Paid Advertising (posts: 234)
Personal (posts: 109)
Politics (posts: 5271)
Race & Racism (posts: 281)
Religion (posts: 819)
Terrorism (posts: 884)
Texas GOP Platform Reform Project (posts: 4)
The Courts (posts: 310)
Watcher's Council (posts: 482)
World Affairs (posts: 345)


January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
December 0000



Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Powered By

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

Administrative Stuff

Email Me
Syndicate this site (XML)

Advertising Disclosure


About Me

NAME: Greg
AGE: 50-ish
SEX: Male
OCCUPATION: Social Studies Teacher
LOCATION: Seabrook, TX
DISCLAIMER: All posts reflect my views alone, and not the view of my wife, my dogs, my employer, or anyone else. All comments reflect the view of the commenter, and permitting a comment to remain on this site in no way indicates my support for the ideas expressed in the comment.

Search This Site

Support This Site

Recent Entries

On Fake News
Who Cares About The Emoluments Clause?
If It Doesn't Bother You, It Should
Bromance Turns America Into Russian Satellite State
Because Many Americans Would Findf The Biblical Plagues To Be Preferable
Because When A Minority Wins An Election, The Majority Must Shut Up
Hope For The Future
My Resignation As Precinct Chair
Resolution Packet For GOP Precinct Conventions
Why #NeverTrump Is The Only Moral Position


Watchers Council
  • Ask Marion
  • Bookworm Room
  • The Colossus of Rhodey
  • The Glittering Eye
  • GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD
  • The Independent Sentinel
  • JoshuaPundit
  • Liberty's Spirit
  • New Zeal
  • Nice Deb
  • The Noisy Room
  • The Razor
  • Rhymes With Right
  • The Right Planet
  • Simply Jews
  • Virginia Right!
  • Watcher Of Weasels

  • Political & Religious Blogs