After Charlie Hebdo attack, U.S. Catholic group says cartoonists ‘provoked’ slaughter

The Washington Post ^ | 1/7/2015 | Ishaan Tharoor

[Kevin C]

In the aftermath of the deadly assault on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a French satirical newspaper, much of the world has rallied in solidarity with the publication, its irreverent cartoonists and their right to free speech. But not everyone is so supportive. Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, a U.S. organization that "defends the rights of Catholics," issued a statement titled "Muslims are right to be angry." In it, Donohue criticized the publication's history of offending the world's religiously devout, including non-Muslims. The murdered Charlie Hebdo editor Stephane Charbonnier "didn’t understand the role he played in his [own] tragic death," the statement reads. "Had [Charbonnier] not been so narcissistic, he may still be alive," Donohue says, in what must be one of the more offensive and insensitive comments made on this tragic day. "Killing in response to insult, no matter how gross, must be unequivocally condemned. That is why what happened in Paris cannot be tolerated," says Donohue. "But neither should we tolerate the kind of intolerance that provoked this violent reaction." The statement says Charlie Hebdo has "a long and disgusting record of going way beyond the mere lampooning" of religious figures. "They have shown nuns masturbating and popes wearing condoms," Donohue says. "They have also shown Muhammad in pornographic poses." Among the covers is a too-racy-for-WorldViews depiction of the Christian Holy Trinity locked in a three-way homosexual orgy (as part of a critique of French religious leaders' opposition to gay marriage) and a whole array of images mocking pedophilia by priests. Charlie Hebdo doesn't pull its punches. But some critics say it goes too far, specifically with Muslims.

[VideoDoctor]

Hide under your bed Donohue. We'll call you when it's safe to come out.

What a DWEEB.

[Mrs. Don-o]

“Offensive and insensitive.” Seems to be a lot of that going around these days.

[usconservative]

You go right on ahead and keep trying to minimize the fact that Donohue blamed the victims and not the muslim terrorists.

His words were quoted, they are indisputable.

[al_c]

Unfortunately, thinking that the avoidance of anything that could be potentially offensive to Islam will ensure peace is delusional.

I never said such a thing. As a matter of fact, I don't believe there is anything that anyone can do to bring peace with them. They've been at war with the world since the beginning of their warped religion.

But back to my point … is it wise to poke a hornets nest with a stick? Nope. Doesn't change the fact that hornets will still exist, but it does piss them off.

[HomerBohn]

...there is now no Catholic Church nor will there be a Catholic Church ever again...

Sedevacantist chapels are alive and well and more springing up all the time.

[al_c]

Respectfully, I consider your attitude as equating to appeasement. I disagree.

Respectfully? Calling me an appeaser is not very respectful, IMO. Please read the post I just made before this one.

[al_c]

Charlie Heb did cartoons o the Pope half naked and wearing a condom, nuns masturbating with crucifixes, and Our Lord doing things I can't describe. I would be RIGHT to be angry, but not JUSTIFIED in going out and murdering people.

Exactly! Thanks for pointing that out.

[dfwgator]

The cartoonists’ habit of producing vulgar, obscene, blasphemous filth was and is wrong.

So what would you do about it?

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Donohue blamed the victims and not the muslim terrorists."

More exact to say he blamed the victims AND the Muslim terrorists. He said people who are subjected to baiting and provocation will get angry. He's talking about obscene and sexually humiliating imagery, which Charlie Hebdo used against Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Christ, Israel, as well as all the French Left's politically conservative opponents--- for instance images which would anger us greatly if they were portraying Sarah Palin or Mia Love, let alone Mary the Mother of Our Lord.

Donohue says that murder is not justified, but that anger is. He does not say this makes the murders less reprehensible; he says murder is not to be defended in any case whatsoever. It's even possible that the editor Charb was a reckless narcissist and obscenity monger, kinda like Robert Mapplethorpe perhaps, who similarly amused the Left by desecrating persons and objects sacred to others. I don't know. But nobody says he "needed killin'", so your argument falls short.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I said “Catholic” churches.

[NorthMountain]

I'd start off by openly stating the obvious ... that "Charlie Hebdo" has a habit of producing vulgar, obscene, blasphemous filth ... and that such things are the products of diseased minds ... and that they appeal to an audience of diseased-minded people.

I might go on by praying to God for their repentance and conversion.

What about you? How do you respond to their filthy, vulgar, obscene blasphemy?

[ConservingFreedom]

The statement says Charlie Hebdo has "a long and disgusting record of going way beyond the mere lampooning" of religious figures.

You know what's really disgusting, Billy? Blaming the victims while their blood still stains the ground.

You do not speak for this Catholic.

[sitetest]

Dear Mrs. Don-o,

“...Muslims can reasonably be angry about pictures of him being buggered.”

That's a little bit of moving of the goal posts. The original Danish cartoon to which the filth initially objected - and murdered over - was a depiction of the stinking fake prophet as a bomb. Considering that moslems are by and large violent, raging, human-hating terrorists when given the opportunity, it was an accurate depiction of reality. It's tough to make the case that they have a right to be offended by reality. The cartoon that set them off a few years back was the one with the caption, "100 lashes if you don't die laughing," which is hardly obscene, except in the sense that it's a pretty obscenely-weak pun.

Part of the problem is that it takes almost nothing to offend to the frenzy of mass murderer these savages. Just depicting the fake prophet at all sends them over the cliff. Even if they deserved any respect whatsoever (which they don'), they're so objectively over-the-top in their expectations in a world that's 80% non-moslem, that their very thought processes are an offense to civilized society.

But even if they were responding to a picture of their fake prophet in such a position, no, they may not legitimately be angry.

That is a privilege that accrues only to the civilized. The mohammedans are savage, uncivilized barbarians.

Those willing to show respect for others, and willing to discourse civilly deserve civil discourse in return. Those willing to discuss differences, rather than murder over them, deserve that others will not tear down their holy objects with ridicule and mockery.

Those who assert a right to murder, rape, pillage, plunder, and enslave others in the name of God do not deserve these courtesies. In fact, what they deserve is belittlement, scorn, contempt, return anger, vituperation, shunning, exile from humanity, and even death. They are murderers, their father is Satan, and they will return to their father at death.

“As far as they know, you're just blaspheming a man of God, and they feel humiliated and violated by it,...”

That's irrelevant. The criminal may be angry when sentenced to a long prison term, but he has no right to his anger. They may feel it all day long, but as they are uncivilized savages, they have no right to the feeling. As they are murderers and rapists who harm innocents for being infidels, they have no right to these feelings, or any respect for these feelings.

Donahue is an apologist for murderers, rapists, and enslavers.

“...just as we feel violated by the way CH portrayed the Most Holy Trinity and the Blessed Virgin Mary, demeaned by obscenity.”

The day I start using rusting blades to saw off Bill Maher’s head for his offenses against Catholicism, I lose my right to feel angry by any abuse of my Catholicism.

The right to respect is earned. The right to indignation or anger for having one’s sacred things blasphemed is earned through reciprocity, by being willing to be tolerant of the other. The moslem filth blaspheme the Most Holy Trinity all day long. I've never advocated that a hair on their heads be harmed for that blasphemy. Far from it. Although they are all filthy blasphemers, if they were to live in peace with us, I would count them good neighbors, share the Gospel as best as I could, respect them, and pray for their souls.

That is the respect that is earned by not murdering, raping, pillaging, plundering, looting, buggering, and enslaving those whom you consider infidels.

As for your student at East Tennessee, I have already stated that it is unfair that it is the “extremist, fringe” 95% of moslems that make it hard on the “moderate, mainstream” 5%. But this vast (lol) “moderate, mainstream” group will just have to suffer until they finally put down the 95% that want to kill us all.

Even if there are 10 such good and “decent moslems” on the earth (an iffy proposition), islam itself OBJECTIVELY deserves ridicule for the murdererous ways of nearly all of its adherents. If these 10 “decent moslems” have hurt feelings because of that, then THAT'S GOOD. Let them understand why their filthy religion is so hated by civilized men. Let them feel the just anger and the contempt that normal, non-barbarian peoples, the loathing and contempt that we feel toward their sick, evil, demented cult, so that they may investigate the cause of this near-universal despising, which is that the nature of the cult is evil, and they and their religion come from the devil, and they must flee it to avoid eternal damnation.

"Let them put down the... guns."

Unfortunately, they will likely not put down theirs until we have taken up ours and killed them in large numbers. That is what barbarians understand - force and violence.

Islam must be destroyed.

sitetest

[caww]

...."U.S. Catholic group says cartoonists ‘provoked’ slaughter"....

These 7th century savages view human life as a tool to be used to meet a political agenda and are simply the "military wing" of Islam which is funded and supported by the Muslim Mosques and organizations throughout the world and here.

Just as with Liberal left Progressives.... Muslim leaders view the individual as 'a dispensable cog' to be used and then destroyed for the perceived good of the collective..... The left in the U.S.A. wishes to embrace these barbarians as now does catholicism as is evidenced by their actions and words.

By their fruits you shall know them....

Pope Francis..... "We Christians should embrace with affection and respect Muslim immigrants to our countries"

The Koran and Muslims deny the essential dogmas of Christianity : the Trinity, the Incarnation and Redemption. ..... you can not say as the Pope did that... "The sacred writings of Islam retain part of Christian teachings".... You simply must speak of the "Jesus of the Koran" which has nothing to do with the Jesus of the Gospels

Cozy fellowship...Pope Francis prays alongside Grand Mufti in Istanbul’s Blue Mosque

[MeganC]

To give the RC Church its due, it did correct the molestation problem, or at least addressed it.

This was only after their dramatic efforts to hide and cover up these crimes failed. Even then the RCC circled the wagons and moved offending priests around to obstruct justice.

In the end they were forced to deal with the problems and then they did their best to get in front of the issue to try to look like good guys. They didn't fool me.

[caww]

BTW....Francis was Facing Mecca, bowed his head in prayer for several minutes while standing next to Istanbul’s Grand Mufti Rahmi Yaran. The Vatican described the gesture as a “moment of silent adoration” of God.

However Francis facing Mecca with the Grand Mufti speaks volumes of what God he bowed before.

[caww]

The Pope said in his exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (paragraphs 252-253) .. that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.”

That is a lie for reality does not confirm his statement.

The Koran is full of bellicose and hate-mongering verses against non-Muslims. ..if he really read the Koran he would easiy be able to find them...Here are just a "few":

2:191-193: “And slay them wherever you come upon them, […] Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s.”......4:89: “If they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper.”..........5:33: “This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, […]: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land.”..........8:60: “Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to terrify thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy.”...... 9:5: “When the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush.”......9:29: “Fight those who believe not in Allah.”........9:30: “The Christians call Christ the son of God. That is a saying from their mouth; they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them.”........9:123: “O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you; and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing.”........47:4: “When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks.”

[caww]

....”To give the RC Church its due, it did correct the molestation problem, or at least addressed it”.....

Saying they addressed it is like polticians saying they’re “addressing” our immigration problems...and we see how that’s working with them mulitplying in our nation. So to in the catholic church.

[exit82]

Look, I am not RC, but no one can deny they have addressed the molestation problem.

It should not happened in the first place, granted.

But they stopped sweeping it under the rug.

That’s what I was noting. And that is factual.

[HomerBohn]

I said “Catholic” churches.

I know. I know.

Whether you know it or not today, those churches subservient to the Vatican, are not Catholic. What they represent is an entire new religion that has nothing to do with traditional Catholicism.