|
Some Additional Bits On The Hebdo Attack
On the Hebdo attack go read "Unmournable Bodies" by Teju Cole who seems to somewhat agree with my take.
It seems that the attackers were underclass French boys who, out of not finding much sense in their lives, jumped on the first ideology that came along and promised them meaning. They were only tangentially, if at all, related to the various fundamentalist AQ entities in the Middle East.
The whole political outrage over "free speech" in this case is completely made up. There is no "free speech" in France or elsewhere in Europe or in the U.S. Most states have blasphemy and lèse-majesty laws. Additionally social laws are effectively in place against other speech issues. Just try to make a few public point about the racist colonizations project of some east European in west Asia and see the reaction. Hebdo Charles itself fired one of its writers for alleged anti-semitism. A court ruled the writer was unlawfully terminated without a sane reason.
My personal position is that there is not, and should not be, an absolute right to "free speech". "Free speech" is often abused to provide cover for sawing strife within groups and nations and between them. Societies are, in my view, right to keep the most vile stuff within their frames of reference off limits.
Some people think that all Muslims should somehow responsible for the three lunatics in Paris and should apologize. Here (audio) is a really good response to such nonsensical requests.
France is the no. 1 W. country that is ‘supposedly’ vulnerable to civil strife thru manipulation of the Arab-muslim dimension – large no. present thru long-standing cheap-labor immigration, colonialist past and yes *present*, racism against Arabs, etc. – but it resisted until recently (but see the Merah shootings in 2012, but who remembers that? See how fast that indignation goes down the memory hole?)
The original idea of terrorist attacks (since some time before 9/11, other topics left out,..) was to whip up hate against enemies of Israel – Arabs, muslims – who coincidentally had their expensively-clad cotton derrières sitting on massive spouting oil reserves. 9/11 was then used to justify invading ‘n destroying Afghanistan and Iraq.
Russia, Turkey, others, all in raucous yet uniform chorus after 9/11, we TOO will FIGHT TERRORISM, etc. (First! our own internal enemies! ..ha ha..) The only terrorism and contra-terror rationales or actions the Hegemon allows are against Ayrabs, sand-niggers, muslims, radical islamists etc. without any exceptions. Note good Muslims can exist, e.g. moderate rebels in Syria or the Muslim Brotherhood, Morsi, in Egypt.
Islamist terrorism became a wet-dream script for a) provocateurs, thin on the ground, but maybe some cartoonists who earn good pay, b) authoritarians, law enforcement, arms sellers, bio-warfare types, etc., c) those who want to show subservience, loving hands, to the USA.
Add on, d) non-white angry potential criminal sadist or murderer, as there is some support, rationale, etc. hovering to be embraced thru the pretense of love for the Prophet.
C. Kouachi, in F
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clCRRyTvWMo
Partial trans NSBC http://tinyurl.com/n69jo5g
Makes for a heady mix, as I said before, I’m surprised there haven’t been more deathly attacks.
It is too tempting, too easy. Even a modest terrorist attack, outsourced very cheaply, easy to organise, maybe 50K per terrorist (they make money too), three cars, some bombs, phones, or guns, etc., peanuts, can bring tremendous profits, a very lucrative investment, in terms of funding for police, military, weapons, new IT programs, surveillance matériel, experts, pundits on board from day one, new Gvmt. anti-terror program staffed with 150 ppl, justification for Gvmt. surveillance, control, etc. With minimal loss of life! (Surely this is a well-touted excuse?)
Ok, ideally you should torture some folks, but you can pretend to do that or skip it for now.
Posted by: Noirette | Jan 10 2015 18:16 utc | 10
|
