Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

idlewhile
Community Member

PROTESTERS around the West, horrified by the massacre in Paris, have held up pens and chanted “Je suis Charlie” — I am Charlie.

 

They lie. The Islamist terrorists are winning, and the coordinated attacks on the Charlie Hebdomagazine and kosher shop will be just one more success. One more step to our gutless surrender.

 

Al-Qaeda in Yemen didn’t attack Charlie Hebdo because we are all Charlie Hebdo.

 

The opposite. It sent in the brothers Cherif and Said Kouachi because Charlie Hebdo was almost alone.

Unlike most politicians, journalists, lawyers and other members of our ruling classes, this fearless magazine dared to mock Islam in the way the Left routinely mocks Christianity. Unlike much of our ruling class, it refused to sell out our freedom to speak.

Its greatest sin — to the Islamists — was to republish the infamous cartoons of Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten which mocked Mohammed, and then to publish even more of its own, including one showing the Muslim prophet naked.

Are we really all Charlie? No, no and shamefully no.

 

No Australian newspaper dared published those pictures, too, bar one which did so in error.

The Obama administration three years ago even attacked Charlie Hebdo for publishing the naked Mohammed cartoon, saying it was “deeply offensive”.

 

President Barack Obama even told the United Nations “the future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” and damned a YouTube clip “Innocence of Muslims” which did just that. The filmmaker was thrown in jail.

We are all Charlie?

 

In Australia, Charlie Hebdo would almost certainly be sued into silence, to the cheers of some of the very protesters now claiming to be its great defenders.

 

Victoria now has absurd religious vilification laws, thanks to Labor, that were first used to punish two Christian preachers who at a seminar quoted the Koran’s teaching on jihad and — complained the judge — made their audience laugh.

 

Australia also has oppressive racial vilification laws which Prime Minister Tony Abbott had promised to relax but last year decided to keep, saying changing them would become a “complication” in making Muslim Australians side with the rest of us against jihadists.

One more surrender, and did you note how most “serious” journalists brayed for this muzzle? Celebrated when two of my own articles were banned?

 

But our journalists haven’t really needed a muzzle. They have been only too eager to shut themselves up rather than call out the growing threat of jihadism, brought to us by insanely stupid programs of mass immigration from the Third World.

 

When Dutch political leader Geert Wilders toured Australia to warn against the danger Islamism posed to our physical safety and our freedom, he was treated as a pariah and the protesters who pushed and heckled his audience were handed the microphone instead.

When jihadists screaming “Allahu Akbar” shot dead US soldiers at Fort Hood or coffee shop patrons in Sydney, ABC and Fairfax journalists pretended they had no idea what ideology could have motivated such slaughter.

 

When Boko Haram jihadists screaming “Allahu Akbar” kidnapped nearly 300 Nigerian schoolgirls, forcing them to convert to Islam and selling them to be raped, Islamist apologist and terrorism lecturer Waleed Aly refused even to acknowledge on Channel 10 that Boko Haram actually had an Islamist agenda, describing it merely as a group of vigilantes.

 

 

An armed police officer in Paris.

An armed police officer in Paris.

 

And when SBS filmed the then Mufti of Australia, Sheik Hilaly, praising suicide bombers as heroes in the Lakemba mosque just days before the September 11 attacks, it refused to air the footage for fear we might get the “wrong idea”.

This will go on. Be sure of it. Your ruling classes will not easily admit to having made an error that cannot now be fixed. It will prefer oppression to freedom, if that brings at least the illusion of peace — and many may even think they are right.

Hear already the lies.

 

You are told Muslim groups condemn the killings as unIslamic. Yet the Koran and Hadith preach death to unbelievers who mock Islam, and tell of Mohammed killing poets, singing girls and others who made fun of him.

No greater authority than the Ayatollah Khomeini, the then spiritual ruler of Iran, ordered the killing of writer Salman Rushdie for making mock of Islam in his The Satanic Verses.

 

We are also told the pen is mightier than the sword, but tell that to the people in the Charlie Hebdo office who found their fistfuls of pens no match for two Kalashnikovs.

 

Tell that now to even the brave leaders of Jyllands-Posten, who, after years of jihadist plots against their staff have had enough, refusing now to republish cartoons from Charlie Hebdo for fear of yet more attacks.

“It shows that violence works,” it admitted.

Everywhere you will find other papers making the same call.

We are all Charlie?

Bull. Absolute self-serving rubbish. The sell-outs are everywhere and will grow stronger.

The West’s political leaders have already told Muslim leaders they agree that mocking Islam is a sin, and have even passed laws — in France, too — making it unlawful.

 

They have attacked the very few journalists and politicians who dared warn against the Islamist threat.

Some now back Muslim demands for a boycott of Israel or at least greater recognition for the terrorists who run large parts of Palestinian territory.

 

Anything for peace, even if it means 
submission.

And for all the protests this past week, submission is what you must expect.

 
Message 1 of 93
Latest reply
92 REPLIES 92

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.


@*pepe wrote:

they are not making social commetary though, they are ridiculing ticking timebombs, didn't that work out well for them hey.


no, but they're not going to stop.

 

 

This week's issue of Charlie Hebdo will contain cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed and the front cover will be unveiled tonight, the magazine's lawyer confirmed today.

 

The surviving members of the magazine's staff decided to print images of the holy figure in defiance of Muslim extremists who slaughtered their colleagues on Wednesday last week.

Lawyer Richard Malka said this week's issue, which is expected to sell 1million copies when it comes out in two days's time, will 'of course' contain images of the Prophet.

 

Mr Malka told France Info radio: 'We will not give in. The spirit of 'Je suis Charlie' means the right to blaspheme.

'We will not give in otherwise all this won't have meant anything. A Je Suis Charlie banner means you have the right to criticise my religion, because it's not serious.


www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2906841/Wednesday-s-Charlie-Hebdo-magazine-include-cartoons-Prophet...

 

The latest front page of Charlie Hebdo has been released, showing the Prophet Mohammed holding a Je Suis Charlie sign under the banner "All is forgiven".

 

This week's publication, the first issue of the French satirical weekly since last Wednesday's deadly attack in Paris, will be offered in 16 languages.

 

The surviving members of the magazine prepared the edition in the offices of French newspaper Liberation, which said three million copies would be printed.

"Charlie Hebdo will be in kiosks this Wednesday, January 14. Like it is every week," Liberation said.

 

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-13/charlie-hebdo-latest-edition-since-attacks-to-go-on-sale/60137...

Message 91 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.


@icyfroth wrote:

interesting also was this news item that largely went unnoticed:

 

https://www.intellihub.com/police-commissioner-investigating-charlie-hebdo-attack-commits-suicide-wr...

 

 

Although reports claim that Helric Fredou suffered from “depression” and “burn out” some remain skeptical that Fredou was ‘suicided’, murdered, by a third-party in an attempt to quell information he gained after speaking with key individuals during his investigation.


Someone posted links to the story yesterday.  Very sad outcome for him and his.

Message 92 of 93
Latest reply

Re: Are we all Charlie? no no and shamefully no.

Apologies for omitting the source of that article I posted.Rundle-Crikey.
Message 93 of 93
Latest reply