Horrific Assault on Charlie Hebdo in Paris Pointless Loss

 

A dozen innocent workers slaughtered in the satirical, off color, caricatural and mocking news magazine Charlie Hebdo in Islamic supremacist military styled assault where the Islamic militant assailants were said to have claimed in their cowardly assault yelling, “The Prophet has been avenged.” These craven, contemptible, gutless defenders of the permanently offended adherents of Islam armed with Kalashnikovs and reportedly a rocket launcher assailed the office braving the potential threat from cartoonists and editorialists armed with markers and pens to avenge their revered divinely inspired prophet from the sharp wits of sarcasm and potential mockery. Far be it from us to mock Allah or Muhammad, but gutless weasels using hot lead to answer cold ink on paper deserves mockery and the firmest and most severe enforcement of the laws of man as that itself would be the unkindest cut of all. Bringing these depraved, vile, inhuman poltroons before French law and broadcasting their trial revealing the complete contemptuous temerity of these defenders of the faith displayed during their flash assault on the offices of the Charlie Hebdo where they print the caustic and farcical magazine where the crime of permitting their irreverent humor to traipse through their sacred realm was simply beyond their limited tolerance.

 

Obviously my attempts at sarcasm and mockery simply prove that I would never likely be hired to write for Charlie Hebdo even if I chose to apply for a position. What the writers and cartoonists do is a form mixing humor, writing, cartooning mixed with sarcasm adding a touch of mockery and a heavy sprinkling of ridicule and a heavy dose of lampoonery all intended to tickle the funny bone of a select portion of the public and is intended to amuse and allow for the dispensing a bromide against hard news by softening the daily realities with humor and irreverence. My sympathies and regrets go out to those from the magazine and their loved ones, friends and readers for their losses and distresses they suffered yesterday. With a dozen slaughtered needlessly with two being police and the rest being writers, cartoonists and employees of the Charlie Hebdo magazine plus another ten injured, four or five seriously, and rumored of one individual taken hostage, we can only hope and pray that there was no hostage or that at least they are released unharmed. This price in human carnage is simply horrendous though it would be made worse should any freedom of thought be made to die as a result. Freedom of thought is the engine which has driven much of human progress and allowing the forces of fundamentalist zealotry to arrested development. I hope that the irreverent sense of mockery which I have been led to believe is at the root of the humor and entertainment included within the magazine Charlie Hebdo will continue into the future and perhaps they should hire a couple of additional employees whose writing skills may be stunted but their ability to detect threats and deal with them efficiently and with deadly force if required might make for a less nervous workplace going forward. I know such may seem at first to be contrary to the nature of the publishing of a satirical spoofing and humorous magazine, but a safe place is a happy place.

 

Where I have not read Charlie Hebdo magazine, as I speak only a dozen words of French, I have in my life read probably similar print and to this day read the political cartoons as soon as they are updated each day. Where I enjoy humor, I can understand people being offended and upset over the sarcasm or mockery which others find simply amusing and who live for the irreverence of such scorns in print. Where not everybody will not find such publications as acceptable forms of humor, they all know that they have the right to not partake of or read that which they find offensive but that those who make their livelihood from such venues also have the right to market the product of their skills without necessarily fearing threats of violence from those who choose to be offended. Will those who now speak poorly of these defenders of Muhammad now need to guard their doors knowing that by speaking the truth they may face the avengers who demand a price in blood for their own inability to accept any culture which differs from theirs. These same intolerant crazies insist that all honor, respect and tread with the utmost care around their beliefs and sensitivities and claim they be exempted from the laws of the societies within which they reside because they believe that their religious laws take precedence over the laws of the lands where they have chosen to relocate. They demand that all adopt their laws and religion rather than simply moving back to some land where their religion already rules. There are presumably approaching fifty plus nations where the laws of Islam presumably rule but for reasons which escape those most sane, these reverent Muslims decided that it is their primary reason in life to live amongst those they find to be offensive infidels with the strange idea that their mission is to force their religion on these infidels while rejecting the infidel laws while living in their lands. Perhaps there is a new definition for insanity other than trying the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. Wait, perhaps that does apply here as Islam has tried to conquer Europe twice before with the same result, defeat.

 

This time Islam is attempting a new tactic, the slow infiltration by immigration, and their hopes are for a different result this time around. A good friend of mine asked me over a decade ago what would be the end result of the Islamic immigration into Europe, would it result in the Islamization of Europe and the death of Christianity in Europe. My answer did not sit well with him and he simply shook his head and stated solemnly that he hoped I was wrong for a change. I had told him that Europe was not going to have needed Islam to result with the death of Christianity, that Europe would have reached that point on their own without any outside help. The rest of the story was that the Europeans would eventually do what the Europeans have always done, killed those they found to be threatening their way of life. I told him that he knew the history of Europe as well if not better than I did and that their history was drenched in blood, their own when they struck out against each other and any invaders when they banded together expelling any outside threat be that threat from the Mongols, Russians, Cossacks or Islam. That is the one thing that Europeans have always excelled at and this time will be no different. The next day I gave him one small bit of news that dispelled some of the dire conversation of the previous day telling him that the one bright spot was that the Europeans would, to a measurable extent, find their way back to the comforts of their Christian roots as the violence that would prove necessary to retake their continent from the growing threat when they decide that too much is simply too much. He will on occasion remind me of that conversation and ask tentatively if the same will happen in the United States and then quickly retracts the question with a muted whisper claiming not to really want to know. I’m glad he retracts the question as that one I have no answer to provide him on that one. I hope Europe can find a peaceful escape from their invasion as well. I pray this will be the final invasion attempt by Islam and they finally become a reformed religion divorced from violent Jihad.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Ready for Iraq War III?

As many other than just we here have noticed, Iraq has started to come unraveled and violence has risen to levels rivalling or exceeding those from before the surge brought relative calm to the country. There has been a resurgence of al-Qaeda with car-bombs and suicide-bombers, many of whom have targeted the police and security personnel and government offices in particular. There are a number of reasons which we will discuss but the overriding reason which has exacerbated all of the others increasing their deadly effects and that was the inability of United States President Barack Obama and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to reach an agreement which would have permitted American forces to remain in Iraq and assist in establishing and maintaining tranquility. Many of the other problems are persistent throughout the Middle East and derive from the culture and manner in which the area has been ruled since the Biblical era. That is what made the United States presence so vitally necessary because the United States personnel and leadership were able to propose compromises and make such compromises acceptable solely because a third party was making the proposal and was responsible for any compromises that were required. Without the United States as mediator these compromises became impossibly difficult to arrange as neither side was able to culturally accept anything less than victory over any adversary and is culturally unacceptable. This has been evident throughout the so-called Arab Spring (we like to call it Arab Winter) especially in Egypt where this week the trial of former and now deposed President Morsi was to be tried for his role in the deaths of protesters but he refused to recognize the court’s authority as he still claims to be the rightful elected President of Egypt and refuses to accept any other reality.

 

One of the primary problems that face any governing body in the Arab world is that compromise is interpreted as a weakness and that the customs dictate that one is wise to follow the strong horse over the weaker horse. When a leader or government makes a compromise then those with whom they made an accommodation as being in a stronger position and the government is diminished as they were forced to make accommodations instead of forcing their will upon the situation as they are expected by the population to have done. The area has been under the leadership of Kings, Caliphs, Dictators, Emperors, Warlords, or other totalitarian or monarchial governance and this has produced a history and culture which values strength and dominance and seldom if ever compromise and acquiescence. This culture makes the governing forms of such as democracy, republic, parliamentary representation and other governances found throughout the industrialized world virtually impossible to have leading these nations in the Middle East and Northern Africa as these systems work on reaching accords through debate and compromise. The people other than a percentage of the youth find debate a weaker and untrusted manner to resolve differences when it is much preferred to simply demand and threaten and use brutish force in order to implement whatever position the leadership desired without regard for the ideas and concerns of the opposition. The question is how this caused the apparent breakdown in Iraq.

 

The problems came when Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki no longer had United States officers who would have enabled differences to be solved through compromises which the United States personnel would suggest and as the United States with its military victories was unmistakably a strong horse so their suggestion being implemented was seen as their dictating their desired solution despite that it was actually a compromise worked out between all the parties with the United States moderating. Without the ability for moderation the government returned to the norm for the culture which led to the Shiites who were in the majority and had the power eclipsing the Sunni who were now in the weaker position. This was aggravated and made worse as after the decades under Saddam Hussein and Sunni dominance many Shiites were ready for some serious payback. Early after the United States withdrew the vast majority of personnel and the remaining troops were placed in a base outside of the cities out in the desert, the Shiites led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki began removing many of the Sunnis in positions of power. They even placed a number of the Sunni leadership on trial for charges of crimes against the government where the charges were irrelevant as the verdict was predetermined. This led to the Sunnis returning to their position of weakness and under dire threat by the Shiite majority. So what do you think the Sunni did? They turned to the same people who had caused the United States to commit more troops in a strategic move named the Surge where the Shiites were made to accept Sunni near equal participation in government and the Sunni allowed and some even aided the United States in clearing out the elements from al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups, the same al-Qaeda now invited to return by the Sunnis as this provided the protection and power necessary to blunt and possibly turn around the Shiite dominance and oppression. Now there are bombings and shooting and the beginnings of a war which will be every bit as destabilizing and deadly as the civil war is raging in Syria. The results of the renewed violence has murdered over thirteen thousand people with over one thousand in October alone.

 

Currently, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is in Washington conferring with President Obama and other government officials. The rumors are that al-Maliki may be requesting that the United States intervene and provide some answers to the situation that the mismanagement of having the dominant position of power in ruling the nation and refusing to compromise or do anything that might appear as showing weakness leading to the disasters now befalling Iraq. By providing answers al-Maliki means troops, at least sufficient troops to make al-Qaeda think twice about continuing the violence. The problem is the American people very likely do not care or would even permit without large protests for troops to be retuned into a war situation in Iraq. The problem for President Obama is that the al-Qaeda difficulties in Iraq are directly tied to the violence in Syria and in Syria al-Qaeda has been somewhat on the same side against Syrian President Bashir al-Assad but are fighting against what is the presumed United States ally in Iraq, al-Maliki. With the mishandling of Syria from the very beginning President Obama is now in the unenviable position of being for and against the same people as along with al-Qaeda working to aid the Sunnis in Iraq there is also their allies the Muslim Brotherhood, which also was the father organization from which al-Qaeda was spawned. So, will President Obama be supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Tunisia while being sort of supportive of them in Syria except when they attack the pro-democracy minority called the Free Syrian Army, and dead against the Muslim Brotherhood in Iraq? Add to this that the Shiites in Iraq have also cozied up and become very close to the Ayatollahs in Iran and have aided the Iranian efforts to preserve Bashir al-Assad in power in Syria by allowing overflights and transport across Iraq for Iranian supplies, weapons, materials, and troops mostly from the IRGC who are fighting against the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda, the Free Syrian Army and anybody else not aligned with al-Assad. So, will President Obama decide to engage in Iraq War III and who can he blame it on this time, certainly no George W. Bush, thinking on it some more, maybe we should not rule that out.

 

Beyond the Cusp