Paris attacks not truly a response to insult: a tactic to replace Democracy with Shariah

January 8, 2015 by  

The world’s journalists and talk-show hosts are making a mistake. It is an innocent one. The mistake is to report that Islamic terrorists in Paris committed murders and assaults in reaction to the publication of cartoons that mock Islamic prophet Mohammed, or that mock militant Islamic leaders. The only entities served by the mistake are the terrorists and other Islamic Theocrats.

Early on January 7, 2015, two or three (at this point, it is not yet clear) individuals stormed the Paris offices of a business that publishes “Charlie Hebdo”. Charlie Hebdo is apparently known in France for poking fun at any institution – particularly religious or political ones – that some or many people revere. If reports are accurate, the publication essentially is one that uses ridicule to attack moral valuation; to reinforce radical skepticism and moral relativism. It is a publication sure to anger various proponents of the one true gods, and that aims to do so.

Twelve individuals were reported to have been murdered in the January 7, 2015 Paris attack, and more than that number were reported to have been injured. Two police officers – one of whom reportedly was a Muslim – were murdered in cold blood as they attempted to defend the offices of Charlie Hebdo.

World-wide, journalistic responses to the attack have focused on freedom of speech and upon the publication itself. Journalists and others – in an honest show of solidarity – tweeted “I am Charlie Hebdo”. It was akin to a scene in the movie Spartacus, but without any real risk that the journalists so tweeting would be exposed to any harm. Talk radio and TV current affairs shows focused upon whether there should be any limits to free speech and upon who should be held to be at fault when a journalist gets murdered for hurting his murderer’s feelings. Some journalists took the opportunity to toot their own horn for having reproduced older Mohammed cartoons in 2006, when some journalists clearly were afraid to do so.

I am writing so as to encourage all journalists and others to identify the fact that they risk being used by Islamic Theocrats, whether those Theocrats resort to terrorism or to some other tactic. The issue is not free speech, per se. The terrorists are not reacting to a mocking of their revered religious personality, per se. Rather, the mocking is a pretext for violent action that has a broader purpose.

In particular, there exist among followers of Islam those who believe that the only laws that human beings should follow are those dictated by their god, Allah. Allah’s laws – akin to Judeo-Christian “10 Commandments” – are called “Shariah”. The Islamic terrorists who have been murdering so many human beings – whether the victims be relatively-secular Muslims, Christians, Jews, or non-believers – are first and foremost not terrorists but: enemies of human-made law. In other words, they oppose the idea that the governed should make laws for the governed: they oppose Democracy. By hook or by crook – by violent means or by electoral means – they aim to put an end to human-made laws, and to ensure that the only laws that are respected or enforced are those laid down by Allah: Shariah. In short: they aim to replace Democracy with Islamic Theocracy (hence the many attempts by Islamic terrorists to blow up legislatures).

If the media treat the January 7, 2015 attack on Charlie Hebdo as though it was merely the result of angering some over-sensitive Muslims who didn’t like seeing their prophet mocked, the Theocrats win. Specifically, when the issue is characterized as one about offending the sensibilities of some Muslims, we help the Theocrats cover-up their real goal: replacing the laws of human beings with the laws of Allah.

The Islamic Theocrats are not motivated by insult: insult is just a convenient excuse; one that they know even non-Theocrats will believe and to which even non-Theocrats will be sympathetic. The Islamic Theocrats are, in fact, motivated by a desire to destroy Democracy and implement Theocracy. By pretending that their attacks are just reactions to something that has been published, the Theocrats attempt to mask their longer-range Theocratic goal, and to create the false impression that they are just deeply virtuous Muslims reacting to an insult to their revered religious figures. By reporting that the terrorists are reacting to an insult, journalists help Islamic Theocrats to white-wash their aims.

Moreover, by reporting that terrorist attacks are responses to offensive publications, journalists distract their readers/consumers from other pro-Theocratic tactics. Terrorism is but one tactic used to replace Democracy with Shariah. Terror is not an end in itself. Terrorism is one of the many ways to stop people from opposing the advance of Islamic Theocracy. If we all focus upon violent activities, we risk ignoring non-violent means by which Democracy is supplanted by Islamic Theocracy.

As one example: it is no secret, among close observers of electoral politics, that Islamic Theocrats have been rigging political party nomination meetings so as to ensure that Theocrats – whatever their political party affiliation – secure seats in the legislatures of the West. With a vote in a legislature, Theocrats can advance their intended disintegration of Democracy and their integration of Shariah. For the Islamic Theocrats, political parties are merely flags of convenience, especially when they have managed to have each major political party in a given electoral district nominate an Islamic Theocrat.

As another example: in the legislature of the province of Ontario, Canada, deference to Allah and to other alleged gods – i.e., deference to the alleged whims or commandments of alleged omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent entities – has been formalized by way of an official daily opening procedure of the Legislature in which a prayer to one of a rotated number of deities is invoked so as to reinforce the overall message that the whims of a god – someone’s god – reign supreme to the wants or opinions of human legislators and those who elected them. By so formally acknowledging the alleged supremacy of a god’s laws, we have furthered the argument against Democracy and in favour of Shariah.

The bottom line is this. Journalists would best serve their profession and their consumers, by identifying the target of the Paris attacks not as “journalists” or “free speech” or “anti-Mohammed speech” etc., but as Democracy. Charlie Hebdo’s comics are but one excuse for silencing the defence of Democracy, for silencing opposition to Islamic Theocracy, and for directing everyone’s concern to violence, instead of to the various violent and non-violent ways in which Islamic Theocrats are attempting to supplant Democracy and replace it with Shariah. If a journalist really wants to take a stand against the terrorists, they would be well advised not to praise journalists, Charlie Hebdo, or free speech, but to praise Democracy and point to the fact that the bad guys are Theocrats who want to make government the hand not of the governed, but of Allah.

In short, dear journalists: it’s not all about you, or Charlie Hebdo, or freedom of speech. And by championing your alleged bravery in tweeting “Je suis Charlie”, you are helping the Theocrats to convince the public that they are merely upset at having been insulted; that they wouldn’t have done what they did had they or their alleged prophet not been insulted; that they have no other purpose in doing what they do but to avenge the insult of their prophet. You are doing a disservice to the West, which needs to know that terrorism is not a reaction to an offence against Muslim sensibilities, but is one of many tactics serving the end of eliminating Democracy and implementing Shariah. Put another way: you are being used. For the sake of democracy and freedom – including freedom of speech and freedom of the press – don’t let the Theocrats use you.


Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!