I’m reposting this from yesterday’s blog entry at my old site due to its importance:
In 2006, Charlie Hebdo, the French left-wing journal, published a Manifesto against Totalitarianism that I and several others including Taslima Nasreen, Salman Rushdie and Ibn Warraq signed in support of freedom of expression during the Danish Mohammad caricature fiasco. I published the cartoons on my blog at the time too.
Today, the weekly was firebombed for publishing a special edition on the Arab Spring and calling itself Charia (Sharia) Hebdo for the occasion. Mohammad was featured as the ‘guest editor.’
In solidarity with Charlie Hebdo, Mohammad is being featured here as a guest blogger though I can’t really publish anything he’s written because it violates every anti-discrimination code in existence (to say the least!).
A photo will have to do.
Whilst the Islamophobia watch hall monitors will start blaming Charlie Hebdo for provoking the attack, we must target the real cuprits – Islamism – and unequivocally defend free expression and speech.
As I’ve said before, whilst living under an Islamic inquisition, ridiculing Islam and Islamism is an historical task and duty. No ifs and buts!
***
See some other articles I have written on free expression and the Islamic inquisition:
The Islamic Inquisition
زندگی بدون دین زیباتر است مریم جان(بابک از ایران)حمایت
Go Charlie Hebdo !
Shame on Facebook Team: the shutdown Charlie Hebdo page!
Facebook is scared to lose $$$$ ads from millions Muslims worldwide…$$$ worth more than freedom and democracy ! bad bad
Religion always carries fanaticism,fascism,crimes,brainwashing millions people worldwide, get heavy support by states authoritarian govs.
Middle east is actually an heaven for fundamentalist: china is the world factory, as well Middle East is the world leading fundamentalist extremism maker…)
SUPPORT CHARLIE HEBDO, i will buy the first released paper as soon they sell it.
Facebook shut my and Mina Ahadi’s facebook pages too for a while but we started a protest campaign and they finally reinstated it.They’ll do anything for a quick buck and to help Islamists.
Good to see a lefty (or anyone for that matter) oppose Islam. PZ is all-right, but Pharyngula is infested with pseudo-Atheists, who hate Christianity but are in submission to the Religion of Terror, possibly out of abject fear, and brand the critics of Jihad & Sharia as ‘Islamophobes’, e.g.: #160
Posted by: John Morales November 25, 2010 5:03 AM:
‘Wow, ABQ. Must suck to be an islamophobe such as you’
I think PZ’s brilliant and right on but I do agree that there are many atheists who will speak frankly and freely about Christianity as they should but handle Islam with kid-gloves. I have way too many examples for this but just to give you two – 1) at a recent British Humanist Association panel discussion on Islam in a Secular Europe, I was appalled at how skewed the panellists were in support of Islam and religion’s role – this would not have been the case if the BHA had organised a panel on Christianity. I don’t think the BHA would ever say Eccelesiastic courts are people’s right to religion but easily say that about Sharia courts. I’ve blogged about it here. The other example I have recently noticed is that if there is a conference of atheists, only one of us ex-Muslims ever gets invited. It can never be Taslima, Ayaan and myself – one of us seems to suffice, which makes me worry about the situation. Given that we are living under what I call an Islamic inquisition, atheists need to be a lot more proactive in criticising Islam and Islamism. This is not about attacking Muslims – saying so assumes that Muslims are one and the same with their oppressors or that all Muslims are Islamists, which is not at all true. Plus I would love to get to see Taslima once in a while…
“Whilst the Islamophobia watch hall monitors will start blaming Charlie Hebdo for provoking the attack”
Is this similar to the “look at how she was dressed, she was asking for it” argument?
Also: Yay! New blogger to read!
Definitely but worse. Because the ‘look how she was dressed she was asking for it’ argument isn’t hailed as a perspective that defends women’s rights – at least not by progressives. But a whole lot of ‘progressives’ will often support and apologise for Islamism!
So to extend the analogy, it would be
bettermore accurate to say “Look at how she was dressed, she was asking for it and that completely violates the civil rights of the rapist”?perfect.
Just caught up with the news via PZ. Great to see you here Maryam. I’ve heard you speak in the last year of so, probably on BBC radio, and have been very impressed. Looking forward to your posts.
Greg
Australia
A really usefull post – A big thank you I hope you dont mind me writting about this post on my blog I will also link back to this post Thanks
I’m not really into mocking religion, but no one has the right to burn down someone else’s building because they don’t like what was published from there. Anyone who defends that action defends the indefensible.
Oh, and congratulations on being picked up by FTB. I think PZ is right.
Yes but I also think mocking is good and needed. The only way to break taboos and ensure that nothing is deemed too sacred to speak about is often to mock it. So I am all for mocking!
Hi Maryam. Nice to meet you. Seen some vids of panels you’ve been on and liked what I heard.
Welcome to FTB!
[sarcasm]But, if people are allowed to say whatever they want, *and* stoning isn’t legal, how will we ever get PZ to stop putting up videos of those eerie, slime-mold-like, sea dwelling aliens that ruin our Caturdays?[/sarcasm]
Responding to speech with violence – even if the speech horrifies and disgusts you – is against every idea of freedom. The word “terrorism” and “terrorist” get used too often lately, and maybe they even get used too often disproportionately toward Muslims and people from the Middle East. But this is, strictly and precisely, terrorism. The only object can be to make people refrain from certain kinds of speech for fear of violence.
I generally keep a close eye out for bias of all kinds, even in myself and in people who largely agree with me, because it’s very important to me to think and speak clearly and correctly even about one’s enemies. But even from that perspective, anyone who uses Islamophobia as an excuse to blame the victims of a firebombing is contemptible. I’ve seen no evidence that Charlie Hebdo even was biased, and even if they were, in no way could they be said to have “provoked” this staggeringly disproportionate response.