Charlie Hebdo shooting: Free Speech WAS attacked

This article on the telegraph by Michael Deacon posits the following:

Instead, they merely pretend to be offended by cartoons, in order to give themselves a pretext to commit murder…. I don’t think the terrorists “win” if we fail to reproduce cartoons. I think the terrorists “win” if we leap up, gulp down their bait – and hate Muslims.

Basically, there’s this idea that what the terrorists are really trying to do is to provoke racism, and through racism recruit more terrorists. Or, terrorists just want to kill people.

And I don’t agree. The whole alterior motives theory is flawed for 1 simple reason: Muslims are pissed off by blasphemy. While it is easy for a moderate (or a P.C. fuckhead) to condemn the act of terrorism, it is even easier for them to say: “Well, you shouldn’t have insulted the religion, it is offensive.” When that is said, the condemnation of terrorism means nothing.

I get the message of “don’t hate Muslims”, I understand that many Muslims have a sense of self-preservation and would rather not do anything to get them on a wanted list, such as shoot people. I understand that many Muslims probably find violence objectionable, as human beings tend to do. But, I also understand that there’s this idea it is wrong to insult the muslim religion. And that’s what is really wrong.

Understand that we’re not defending free speech from the muslims or even Islam, we’re defending free speech from the fuckheads who want to undermine it. We’re defending freedom of expression from terrorists who would use fear to suppress it, and we’re defending freedom of expression from those who would instigate laws against free speech as a reaction to these attacks, “for our own protection”. We’re fighting the ambiguity that somehow the Charlie Hebdo brought this onto themselves.

When people die for a possible reason that they have offended a terrorist’s religion, other people shut up about the religion in fear for their lives. I don’t hate muslims, except for the muslims who want to silence free speech for the excuse of “racism”. Of course, muslims aren’t exclusive in the matter, there are the politically correct fuckheads I mentioned earlier who would like nothing more than to make people watch what they say through “hate speech” laws, than to make people tiptoe around every issue under the excuse of “Respect”.

Censoring expression isn’t respect, its subservience to an oppressive power.

Regardless of the terrorist’s actual motives, free speech was attacked. And I’m certain there are a good amount of muslims who view the attack as a justified leash on the rampant free expression people in democracies enjoy, there are a good amount of people who agree with the terrorist’s rationale/excuse, not enough to constitute a majority but enough to constitute a threat. When we repost Charlie Hebdo, we are telling the muslims, and the censorship cunts of the world, NO, we are NOT going to bend over and let you control our speech. NO, we are NOT going to live in fear of offending you.

But I am afraid. Here I am, a nobody on the internet, yet I am afraid.

Yesterday I posted the following on facebook, trying to get a grip after being hit by the irrational fear that I too could become a victim for reposting Charlie Hebdo:

So this is the world I have to live in for the rest of my life. A society whose solution to terrorism is to appease the terrorists.

We have the internet, yet without anonymity, the internet is nothing.

Yesterday I would have laughed at the notion of an Orwellian future. I welcome the erosion of privacy- the wall that separates people from mutual understanding.

But now I know that big brother exists, and he’s wielding an AK with a bomb strapped to his chest, daring anyone to say something offensive.

His minions are the politically correct liberals, who are perfectly willing to say “victim blaming bad” for rape victims, but will turn around to victim blame the instant the victim is free speech, hypocrisy!

His minions are the conservative and religious right, who support censorship because they are both in the same boat of obsolescence, and will do everything to protect their “traditional values” from dying, even at the cost of the free world.

Fear will keep the media in line. Fear of jihadist warriors.

If the newspapers decided to print Charlie Hebdo tomorrow, would the governments send armed guards and escorts to protect the papers from being attacked?

Protect free speech at the cost of taxpayer money? Nuh-uh! Are you insane? Free speech can’t be burned for fuel!

And even if you wanted to protect everyone, where would you even begin? No one is safe. Any newpaper’s employee, or even their family members could be attacked, and they would have religious justification backing them up. What bothers me the most – is that no matter how terrible the attack there will always be someone patting the terrorists on the back, saying “you are righteous”.

Sometimes, facts can be racist or sexist. Facts can be prejudiced, certainly against religion. Facts can be Islamophobic. Fact is, Islam is incompatible with free speech, and in a modern democracy Islam has either “adapt” or fuckoff.



If you can't think of anything to comment, just fill in your bank account details or social security number.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s