After Brussels, Charlie Hebdo Fires a Broadside

(h/t Rev Dr Mark Durie)

This is the editorial that was published in ‘Charlie Hebdo’ on 30 March 2016, just eight days after the jihadist ghazi raid in Brussels that murdered 32 people and gravely wounded more than 300 others.  It is worth noting that it takes aim specifically at none other than Frere Tariq.

https://charliehebdo.fr/en/edito/how-did-we-end-up-here/

“How Did We End Up Here?”

‘For a week now, experts of all kinds have been trying to understand the reasons for the attacks in Brussels.

‘An incompetent police force?

‘Unbridled multiculturalism?

‘Youth unemployment?

‘Uninhibited Islamism?

‘The causes are numerous beyond counting, and everyone will naturally choose the one that suits best their own convictions.

‘Law and order fans will denounce the haplessness of the police.

‘Xenophobes will blame immigration.

Partly correct.  It’s not immigration as such that prepared the way for all those dead bodies in the airport in Brussels – and before that, in the Charlie Hebdo office, and the kosher supermarket, in Paris.  It’s Muslim immigration.  Got Muslims? – Got Jihad. – CM

‘Sociologists will rehash the evils of colonialism.

‘Urban-planners iwll point to the evils of ghettoisation.  Take your pick.

‘In reality the attacks are merely the visible part of a very large iceberg indeed.

And now we proceed to get down to tin tacks. – CM

‘They are the last phase of a process of cowing and silencing long in motion and on the widest possible scale.

Yes.  A process by which non-Muslims in western Europe – and many other places, too – have been and are still being ‘groomed’ for either Dhimmitude or, worse, conversion to Islam.  Submission. – CM

‘Our noses are endlessly rubbed in the rubble of Brussels airport and in the flickering candles amongst the bouquets of flowers on the pavements.

‘All the while, no-one notices what’s going on in St-Germain-en-Laye.

‘Last week, Sciences-Po welcomed Tariq Ramadan.  He’s a teacher, so it’s not inappropriate.  He came to speak of his specialist subject, Islam, which is also his religion.

‘Rather like a lecture by a Professor of Pies who is also a pie-maker.

‘Thus judge and contestant both.

‘No matter, Tariq Ramadan has done nothing wrong.  He will never do anything wrong.  He lectures about Islam, he writes about Islam, he broadcasts about Islam.

‘He puts himself forward as a man of dialogue, someone open to a debate.  A debate about secularism, which, according to him, needs to adapt itself to the new place taken by religion in Western democracy.

‘A secularism and a democracy which must also accept those traditions imported by minority communities.

‘Nothing bad in that.

‘Tariq Ramadan is never going to grab a Kalashnikov with which to shoot journalists at an editorial meeting.  N or will he ever cook up a bomb to be used in an airport concourse.  Others will be doing all that kind of stuff.

Ramadan is the ‘good cop’. Those others, the human bombs in Brussels, are.. the ‘bad cop’.  And both are working hand-in-hand to further the process of Islamisation, Islamic conquest and subjugation of the Dar al Harb, the lands of the non-Muslims. –  CM

‘It will not be his role.

‘His task, under cover of debate, is to dissuade people from criticising his religion in any way.

‘The political science students who listened to him last week will, once they have become journalists or local officials, not even dare to write nor say anything negative about Islam.

‘The little dent in their secularism made that day will bear fruit in a fear of criticising lest they appear Islamophobic.  That is Tariq Ramadan’s task.

‘Take this veiled woman. She is an admirable woman. She is courageous and dignified, devoted to her family and her children.  Why bother her? She harms no-one.

‘Even those women who wear the total, all-encompassing veil do not generally use their clothing to hide bombs (as certain people were claiming when the law to ban the burqa was being discussed).

The word to note here is ‘generally’.  Not in France nor other parts of Europe they haven’t…yet. But in the markets of Northern Nigeria , for example, it is a different matter.  There young women in Islamic garb have indeed concealed bombs beneath their coverings, and blown themselves up, amongst women and children, non-Muslim or deemed insufficiently-Islamic. – CM

‘They too will do nothing wrong.

‘So why go on whining about the wearing of the veil, and pointing the finger of blame at these women?  We should shut up, look elsewhere, and move past all the street-insults and rumpus. 

‘The role of these women, even if they are unaware of it, does not go beyond this.

‘The visible part of a very big iceberg.

‘Take the local baker, who has just bought the nearby bakery and replaced the old, recently-retired guy; he makes good croissants.  He’s likeable, and always has a ready smile for all his customers.  He’s completely integrated into the neighbourhood already.

‘Neither his long beard nor the little prayer-bruise on his forehead (indicative of his great piety) bother his clientele.

‘They are too busy lapping up his lunchtime sandwiches.  Those he sells are fabulous, though from now on there’s no more ham nor bacon.

‘Which is no big deal, because there are plenty fo other options on offer – tuna, chicken, and all the trimmings.  So, it would be silly to grumble or kick up a fuss in that much-loved boulangerie.

‘We’ll get used to it easily enough.

‘As Tariq Ramadan helpfully instructs us, we’ll adapt.  And thus the baker’s role is done.

‘Take this young delinquent.  He has never looked at the Quran in his life (don’t be so sure about that – CM) he knows little of the history of religion, of colonialism, nor a great deal about the proud country of his Maghreb forefathers.

‘This lad and a couple of his buddies order a taxi.  They are not erudite like Tariq Ramadan, they don’t pray as often as the local baker, and are not as observant as the redoubtably-veiled mothers on the street.

‘The taxi heads for Brussels airport.

‘And still, in this precise moment, no-one has done anything wrong.  Not Tariq Ramadan, nor the ladies in burqas, not the baker and not even these idle young scamps.

‘And yet, none of what is about to happen in the airport or metro of Brussels can really happen without everyone’s contribution.

That is a very, very significant insight.  – CM

‘Because the incidence of all of it is informed by some version of the same dread or fear.

‘The fear of contradiction or objection.  The aversion to causing controversy. The dread of being treated as an Islamophobe or being called racist.  Really, a kind of terror.

‘And that thing which is just about to happen when the taxi-ride ends, is but a last step in a journey of rising anxiety.  It’s not easy to get some proper terrorism going without a preceding atmosphere of mute and general apprehension.

‘These young terrorists have no need to amass the talents of others, to be erudite, dignified, or hard-working.  Their role is simply to provide the end of a philosophical line already begun.

‘A line which tells us, “Hold your tongues, living or dead. Give up discussing, debating, contradicting or contesting”.

‘This is not to victimise Islam particularly.  For it has no opponent.

‘It is not Christianity, Hinduism nor Judaism that is balked by the imposition of this silence.

There, I would differ somewhat.  Because it is not only secularism but also all other belief systems that Islam consciously sets out to silence; Islam that silences the church bells and the shofar, that forbids the Dhimmi from worshipping or from publicly displaying the symbols of his or her religion. – CM

‘It  [i.e. that which contradicts the silence imposed by Muslims – CM] is the opponent (and protector) of them all.
‘It is the very notion of the secular.  It is secularism which is being forced into retreat.

‘Above all, in a sense, this stops us asking perhaps the world’s oldest and most important question – “How the hell did I end up here?”

“How the hell did I end up having to wander the streets all day with a big veil on my head?”

“How the hell did I end up having to say prayers five times a day?”

Quick answer? – The apostasy law of Islam, based upon the diktat of Mohammed himself as recorded in the canonical Hadith – “If anyone changes his religion [i.e. his ‘deen’, Islam – CM] – kill him.” – CM

‘How the hell did I end up in the back of a taxi with three rucksacks packed with explosives?”

Apostasy law of Islam (if you try to leave, you get killed); blasphemy law of Islam (if you publicly criticise or question any aspect of Islam, you get killed); brainwashing with multiple surahs promising instant paradise if you perish whilst waging jihad fi sabil allah. – CM

‘Perhaps, very sadly, the only people who are still asking themselves that most important of questions are the unlucky victims.

“How the hell did I end up here, six yards away from that big bomb?”

‘The first task of the guilty is to blame the innocent.

‘It’s an almost perfect inversion of culpability. From the bakery that forbids you to eat what you like, to the woman who forbids you to admit that you are troubled by her veil, we are submerged in guilt for permitting ourselves such thoughts.

‘And that is where and when fear has started its sapping, undermining work.  And the way is marked for all that will follow.”

If you are getting flak, as the saying goes, you are over the target.  The shrieking hysterics that erupted amongst the most grovellingly-Islamophile organs of the western press – e.g. the ‘Guardian’ – in response to this sorty by Charlie Hebdo’s editor/s, indicate to me that it is right over the target.

I find it very telling that the author focuses on the stealth Islamisation of the academy, and of food, and of clothing; and on the pre-emptive suppression of non-Muslim unease,  correctly seeing in these things a ‘softening-up’ of the Infidel society that is then assaulted physically by bombs and guns.. by which time it has been so confused and disoriented that it dare not identify nor criticise the ideological driver of the aggression that it suffers.  I am not surprised, either, that a French writer should understand the impact of changes in food and clothing; the French are deeply aware of the socio-cultural significance of such seemingly trivial aspects of life.  
I commend to readers of this very perceptive editorial two chapters in Malcolm Gladwell’s useful book “Tipping Point” devoted to what the author calls “The Power of Context”.  Little things, one after another, can add up to a lot. Little things – like the disappearance of ham and bacon from the lunch menu of a boulangerie, and the disappearance of a woman’s face behind a veil, and the placing of certain things beyond question or criticism, so that when Muslims detonate bombs in an airport filled with hapless Infidels the connection between that mass-murderous act and the many jihad verses not only in the Quran but in the other canonical texts of Islam, cannot and must not be directly and honestly discussed or even thought about, even by the society that has just been bloodily attacked. – CM