By Abdul-Rahman Baban Saibo
babansaibo@gmail.com
It’s barely eleven
months since the Charlie Hebdo attack which claimed the lives of twelve
journalists. The Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine is known for being a
notoriously racist publication with past offensive records .Although the
Charlie Hebdo publication parades itself as strongly “anti-religious,
anti-racist and left-wing” its recent past never subdued it to such respects.
According to the former editor of the publication Stephane Charbonnier, the
magazine’s editorial viewpoints reflects “all components of left-wing pluralism
and even abstainers”, yet still, ‘hate’ articles on the extreme right,
religion, politics and culture remain to be the driving motive behind the
publications’ fame.
Not long after the
attack on January 7th, leaders from all over gathered in solidarity
to sympathize with the French and walked the streets of Paris to demonstrate
their heart-felt grieves and distaste of the senseless acts. I recall how the
social media went viral with the slogan “Je
suis Charlie”, French for “I am Charlie”. Some on twitter went as far as
hash-tagging “Kill All Muslims”. It wasn’t easy for any Muslim who saw that. I
actually almost went to the point of hash-tagging “Kill All Racists”, but I had
to remember, “I am not like them”!
Before any seemingly
rude conclusions though, we must take a snappy look at the recent past of this magazine’s
records. Back in 2000, the then chief editor Phillipe Val wrote an article in
which he referred to Palestinians as “non-civilized”, a result of which got
Mona Cholet a colleague of his, fired for ‘protesting’. In 2006, the magazine
published an article titled “Muhammad overwhelmed by fundamentalist”. The front
page of this publication showed a cartoon of a weeping (so called) Muhammad
saying “it’s hard being loved by jerks”.
In 2007, “Grand mosque
of Paris began criminal proceedings against the chief-editor (Phillippe Val)
under “France’s hate speech law” for publically abusing a group on the ground
of their religion. Lawsuit was limited to 3 cartoons including one depicting
Prophet Muhammad carrying a bomb in his turbine. In March that year, ‘le
tribunal de Paris’ acquitted Val, finding that “it was fundamentalist rather
than Muslims, who were being ridiculed in the cartoons”. –Wikipedia. How
jesting!
In 2008, cartoonist
Maurice Sinet (Sine) had a column citing a rumor that Jean Sarkozy had
announced his intention to convert to Judaism before marrying his Jewish
heiress fiancé. This led to complaints of anti-Semitism. Whence Phillipe Val
ordered that he (Sine) write an apology he replied “I rather cut my own balls
off”. Quiet confident!
In 2011, there was a
fire-bomb attack in the newspaper office. It was speculated that the attack was
carried due to the journal’s decision to renaming the paper to the new “Charia
Hebdo” (in mockery of the Islamic practice of “Sharia”) the following morning.
(Prophet) Muhammad was listed as the editor-in-chief. The cover was to feature
a cartoon of the Prophet of Islam saying; “100 lashes of the whip if you don’t
die laughing.”Queer enough, the then Prime Minister Francois Fillon exercised
no hesitation to voicing his support for the publication.
“In September 2012, the
newspaper published a series of satirical cartoons of (Prophet) Muhammad, some
of which featured nude caricatures of (so called) him.” –Wikipedia. Well that
of course followed the series of attacks on US embassies in the Middle East as
a result of the anti-Islamic movie “innocence of Muslims” then released in
America. Isn’t it funny that the newspaper’s editor would say in an interview
that; “we do caricatures of everyone, and above all every week, and when we do
it with the Prophet, its called provocation”, and yet the government would air
their support?
Sincerely, the 2015
attack shouldn’t have come to no-one as a shocker. For when someone boasts of
insulting other people’s faith in the name of “provocation” should expect not a
thing less, thank goodness, even the Pope agrees with me on that! But as I
already have mentioned, Charlie Hebdo is a “notoriously racist publication”, it
wasn’t nine months after that when the paper published yet another heart
provoking racist caricature of the drowned 3 years old Aylan Kurdi whom was
found dead on the banks of a beach in Turkey. That of course will send any sane
man asking, “Are these Charlie Hebdo humans, or are they the Devils’
advocates”?
As always, the Charlie
Hebdo magazine would present a breath-taking cover of their weekly journal. The
attack on Friday the 13th of this month took Charlie Hebdo just less
than the moment to present a mesmerizing cover, upon which was inscribed; “They
have arms, F*** them, we have the champagne.” How proud? Perhaps, it is as
Peter Herbert says it is, “Charlie Hebdo is a purely racist, xenophobic and
ideologically bankrupt publication that represents the moral decay of France.”
Terror
in France;
The phrase “freedom of
speech” in the West today, has metamorphosed to becoming a shield –a somewhat immunity,
for the “freedom of offence”; the human rights of freedom of expression (in the
West), is now used as the “freedom to hate”; a once regarded tool for minority
communities to seek justice from their oppressive leaders has this-day
transformed to becoming the tool for oppressing them. Isn’t it quiet phony how
the West keeps invading the Muslim nations in the name of reclaiming “social
justice” –a thing themselves have not yet any legitimate means to establish?
Discrimination and
harassment of Muslim-French has transformed to arecurrently transgressing phenomena
since the early 20th century. The Journalist’s Resource reports; “In
2011 the law was extended to ban the wearing of full-face veils in public
places.” To mention but little in retrospect, Muslim men in France have been
constantly challenged of CV discriminations for quiet sometime. In 2012, there
was a heightened distaste against Muslims praying on the streets. Some freedom
of religion and rights to expression that is, indeed. A quiet frightening
environ oneself to be found in.
Since after “the
Holocaust” there has been a continuous dilation of ‘hate’ and ‘intolerance’
against Muslims in France. “Like other European nations, France has a long and
complicated relationship with the Muslim world and its own immigrant
population, many of whom have been in the country for generations… The country
fought a brutal war in Algeria in the 1950s and 1960s, and during the
subsequent civil war, the conflict often spilled out back home — in 1995 an
Islamic group carried out attacks that killed eight people and injured hundreds
across the country. Incidents large and small have occurred since then,
including the shooting spree by Mohamed Merah in 2012. In December 2014, 10
people suspected of being part of a jihadist network were arrested, and a
charity accused of financing terrorism was shut down. Complicating matters is
France’s assertive presence in anti-terrorism operations in the Middle East and
Africa: Its air force has carried out raids against ISIS, and it leads
operations in Mali against Islamist forces.” - Journalist’s Resource (November
16th).
One very compelling
truth about the son of man is forgetfulness. And the amusing thing about how he
forgets is that he finds it surprising when he reaps what himself sewed. The
attack that ended some 129 innocent lives on the 13th of November 2015
did not occur in no place near fluke nor should it be seen in no way as coincidental
act of terrorism. This, has for long been known and anticipated, for it is a thing
themselves have architected for quite a while now. President Francois Hollande
exercised no hesitation in his condolence speech as he concluded “France is at
war”. Indeed. He who sews hate must be certain to reap enmity, terror –for that
is the definite end to his known means.
It is said that the
authorities found a passport of Ahmad al-Muhammad on his remains after
exploding himself to fragments. Am compelled to ask, ‘how could it have
survived’? Another report says a finger found identified the person Omar Ismael
Mostafai said to be one amongst the terrorists whom engaged in the bombing of
the place of concert. But couldn’t Omar be just an audience whom happened to be
at an unfortunate place in an unfortunate time? Questions of sorts needs be
asked at this juncture.
These senseless,
merciless killings are undeserved anywhere in the world, but, as much as I am
obliged to denounce these violence and terror, that’s also as much as I am
obliged to convey the ugly truth to those facing their threats. If one feels that
making a mockery of other people’s icon of faith and claim “freedom, rights”,
why then would it be a crime for another (fanatic) to exercise his own freedom
of expression and rights of retaliation?
France, this is the
land where the first “Declaration of the rights of man” was promulgated, and
where the “doctrines of natural rights” were grounded. It is demeaning to their
leaders today, to shamelessly support hate and racism as if their abolishing of
such “hates” weren’t the sole elements that elevated them to greatness. Perhaps
these leaders needs assume Hilary Clinton’s stands as she proclaimed, “In
democracy, respecting rights isn’t a choice leaders make day by day; it is the
reason they govern.”
