Voices from Russia

Sunday, 25 January 2015

HH Slams Charlie Hebdo’s Mockery of Christians

00 charlie hebdo cover. 13.01.15


On Sunday, Patriarch Kirill Gundyaev of Moscow and all the Russias, the First Hierarch of the MP, said that the cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad in the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo were “childish” compared to the dirt that it dished out to Christians. Charlie Hebdo regularly offended Muslims, Christians, and others with its irreverent cartoons. Earlier this month, gunmen killed 12 people at the Paris office of the weekly; they said that they were avenging the Prophet Mohammad, whom the magazine depicted in cartoons, defying a ban in Islam on representing its founder. Kirill stated in a sermon broadcast by Rossiya-24 TV that he opposed both terrorism and giving offence to religious feelings, saying, “The cartoons of Prophet Mohammad are childish caricatures compared to what this publication allows itself in mocking the feelings of Christians. Today, in saying ‘no’ to terrorism, killings, and violence, we also say ‘no’ to the inexplicable drive by a certain group of people to deride religious feeling”.

25 January 2015

Gabriela Baczynska

Gareth Jones




Friday, 16 January 2015

#IlSontHypocrites: Why should Charlie Hebdo Deaths Mean More than Those in Novorossiya?

00 Ya Vanya. Donbass anti-fascist. 16.01.15.jpg-large

I shot down Flight MH17

I killed 4,634 civilians in the Ukraine

But tonight I’ll be in Paris


The Western public justly condemns the murders at Charlie Hebdo, but continues to behave as if Kiev’s terror victims in the Donbass are “subhuman”. On 7 January, masked terrorists massacred the staff of the magazine Charlie Hebdo in downtown Paris, killing ten. The terrorists also gunned down two police officers (one of them a French Muslim, Ahmed Merabet) in the attack, whilst five more innocents lost their lives during a subsequent hostage standoff at a Parisian kosher store. The police killed three male suspects, while their female accomplice reportedly fled to ISIS-held parts of Syria. The attack was allegedly a reprisal for the magazine’s cartoon covers, condemned as “blasphemous” for mocking Islam and its prophet, Mohammed.

Meanwhile, in [Novorossiya], forces loyal to the NATO-backed junta in Kiev renewed terror bombing of civilians in the Donbass, killing and maiming indiscriminately. Whilst they declared the slain French cartoonists martyrs on the altar of free speech in a social media campaign under the hashtag #JeSuisCharlie (I am Charlie), Russophobic propaganda soon hijacked a similar Twitter campaign to raise awareness of civilian deaths in Donbass (#IamVanya). Part of the problem is that free speech isn’t demonstratively a sacred value in the West. The same public in Europe or the USA that proclaims #JeSuisCharlie today, has, in recent years, organised increasingly-frequent public witch hunts in the name of political correctness, targeting individuals whose words or deeds somehow “offended”, from scientists who dared mention IQ (or wear “sexist” shirts) to celebrities and video game producers. In 2009, Charlie Hebdo sacked cartoonist Maurice Sinet (now 80) over one allegedly “anti-Semitic” cartoon. France arrested dozens of people, including the comedian Dieudonné, on charges of “hate speech” in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo massacre.

Meanwhile, using the pretext of the attacks in Paris, the US and British governments pushed for expanding their already extensive surveillance of the public. This despite the fact that the alleged attackers on Charlie Hebdo were known terrorists and under constant surveillance, but were able to carry out the massacre unhindered. There was further hypocrisy at the march for solidarity held on Sunday, 11 January. While more than a million French marched peacefully through Paris to honour the slain, some forty world leaders supposedly led the way. However, raw footage showed them marching separately for a photo-op, separated from the “common folk” by quite a distance and heavy police protection.

Although American pundits were loudest in calling for another “war on terror”, American officials weren’t at the Sunday march. Only the US Ambassador attended the event… President Obama, Vice President Biden, or even top diplomat John Kerry were conspicuously absent. The highest-ranking US official in Paris was Attorney General Eric Holder, who announced his resignation in September 2014. The leaders that did attend weren’t above using the march for their own political purposes. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu came to the march, even though the French government asked him not to. Turkey’s Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu also attended, but as soon as he returned, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan publicly declared the massacre a French false-flag operation, for which the mayor of the Turkish capital Ankara, İbrahim Melih Gökçek, blamed the Israeli Mossad. Perhaps, the most hypocritical of all was the Kiev junta, whose leader, P A Poroshenko, hastened to Paris to claim he too was a victim of “terrorism”, even as his forces restarted the terror shelling of civilians in the Donbass. Poroshenko paraded before the cameras, dutifully made accusations of yet another “Russian invasion”, again accused Russia of being behind the downing of flight MH17, and begged for money from the West to bail out his bankrupt government, and fund another military expedition against the civilians in the Donbass.

Whilst Poroshenko pretended that his heart bled for French cartoonists, the civilians targeted for extermination by his government were bleeding literally… dozens, including children, died in renewed shelling of Donetsk by the junta military that weekend. Amongst them was a boy of eight named Vanya, who lost his legs, a hand and an eye (Warning: graphic imagery) to Kiev’s “humanitarian” bombs. When critics of the junta’s campaign of artillery terrorism posted news of this on Twitter with the hashtag “#IamVanya” (#Яваня), Russophobic trolls quickly responded with displays of hatred. Hypocrisy is the order of the day in the West. Frenchmen and other “NATO-sphere” subjects are supposed to simultaneously champion free speech and crack down on “offensive” speech; profess love of Islam and endless tolerance, whilst their governments sponsor Islamic terrorists in places like Libya, Syria, Iraq, or the Balkans; and protest the murder of innocents while backing the Kiev’ junta doing precisely that, in the name of… you guessed it… “fighting terrorism”.

Of course, NATO’s puppets in Kiev have the perfectly “rational” explanation why it’s different when they kill… their victims are “subhumans”, as US-backed PM A P Yatsenyuk once put it. The same man, during his visit to Germany just a day after the Charlie Hebdo massacre, claimed that Russia “invaded the Ukraine and Germany” in World War II. His German hosts, normally sensitive to pro-Nazi rhetoric, chose to remain silent.

16 January 2015

Nebojša Malić



Thursday, 15 January 2015

Experts Say Latest Charlie Hebdo Cover Might Aggravate Hostility

00 charlie hebdo mohammed cover. 15.01.14


On Wednesday, experts told Sputnik that one could see that the recent cover of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo depicting Prophet Mohammed as a decision to exercise the right to freedom of speech, but it could have a negative effect on French society. Peter Mandaville, Director of the Ali Vural Ak Center for Global Islamic Studies at George Mason University, said, “I don’t think that anyone can question whether this newspaper has the right to print this picture, this image, on its cover. I think there’s something of a question of whether this was, in social terms, the appropriate thing to do at this time. At a time when there’s risk of increased polarisation in society, with risk of increased hostility towards the Muslim community in France, there’s a question of what this choice does to the overall social temperature in the country”.

On Wednesday, French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo published its first issue after the horrible massacre at its Paris headquarters last week. The front page depicted Prophet Muhammad holding a sign “I Am Charlie” in French. People around the world used this slogan to show solidarity with victims of the brutal killings. Professor Mandaville explained that the French Muslim community found itself in a difficult position. Many French Muslims strongly condemn criminal violent acts of terrorism. At the same time, they want to voice disagreement with the editorial orientation of the magazine. However, Mandaville pointed up that if French Muslim leaders condemned the Prophet Mohammed caricature, in the eyes of public they look like “intolerant French Muslims”.

Omid Safi, Professor of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies at Duke University and Director of Duke Islamic Studies Center, said, “In this case, satire isn’t directed against the wealthy, the rich, the powerful, the state, or the military, but rather towards a community that’s already the most marginalized and dispossessed in their own country. French Muslims are the children of the former French colonies, amongst the poorest in France, already demonised by a significant percentage of French society. I don’t see this as satire, but rather as bullying and racism”. He pointed up that 27 percent of French people didn’t like Muslims before the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

Professor Mandaville said, “Obviously, if one satirises the French political elite, that’s fine. They’re in a position of power. The Catholic Church and other Christian institutions in France aren’t in a position of actual jeopardy. Muslims and other immigrants in the country are. It’s quite appropriate to use satire as a way to deal with some issues, but there should be a distinction between satire and racism. I think that some of the work of Charlie Hebdo sometimes crossed that line, on the side of racism”.

Professor Safi expressed another concern about double standards that one could see in the actions of Charlie Hebdo managing team, observing, “Back in 2008, we know that Charlie Hebdo fired an editor because he made what they deemed anti-Semitic comments. So, why is it that making anti-Semitic comments is deemed grounds for dismissal, but offending Islam is a measure of ‘freedom of speech?’ So, I think we have to take the context into consideration”.

On Wednesday, al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen claimed responsibility for the deadly attacks on the Charlie Hebdo Paris offices that killed 12 people, including 10 magazine staff. According to an internet video released by the group, it warned that more terrorist attacks would happen in future, if Western countries continue their “insults”.

15 January 2015

Sputnik International


Read More:

Turkish Court Bans Websites Depicting Latest Charlie Hebdo Cover: Reports

New Charlie Hebdo Issue With Prophet Muhammad on Cover Published in France

France and Nigeria: How the World Media Responds to Terrorism… Black Lives DO Matter

00 je suis charlie. boko haram. 15.01.14

“Let’s not forget Boko Haram’s victims!”


The media gave ubiquitous coverage of the Charlie Hebdo attacks; nevertheless, the world ignores 2,000 people killed in the worst Boko Haram massacre yet. The world’s undivided attention on France following the attacks on the Charlie Hebdo offices and a kosher supermarket completely overshadowed a much bloodier terrorist attack, a Boko Haram raid on Baga in Northern Nigeria, which killed as many as 2,000 people. The incident led to public debate over the media’s role in reporting events and the weight that one should give certain events as compared to others.

One issue when it comes to uneven coverage is that of media visuals. Whilst Paris is a global city and has thousands of reporters and cameras, all of whom one can easily dispatch to report on the event, Baga is a town in the remote northeast corner of Nigeria, on the coast of Lake Chad. Unlike Paris, the area is unsafe for journalists… Boko Haram fighters still roam freely and there’s a risk of attack as the Nigerian Army is still struggling to secure the area. A Haaretz editorial arguing for greater sympathy with the victims of the Nigerian terrorist attacks brought up the fact that attention to Nigeria’s Bring Back Our Girls campaign has been nil. They ascribed the failure to the Nigerian government’s inability to deal with the Boko Haram problem, despite military aid from Washington, because of its own corruption and human rights violations. The Guardian also echoed this criticism of the Nigerian political establishment; its readers learned that many Nigerians think that their government is to blame for the lack of coverage and focus on the tragedies. The Sydney Morning Herald reported that the Nigerian President expressed condolences for the victims of the Charlie Hebdo attacks, but not for the people killed by Boko Haram.

Although it may seem unfair to blame the Nigerian government’s inability to overcome the world’s indifference to Nigeria’s troubles, political motivation does play a role. As CNN noted, the attention on Charlie Hebdo and the national unity rally that followed it appeared to benefit Hollande, who before the attacks had an abysmal 13 percent approval rating, and to hurt Marine Le Pen’s National Front because of its focus on national unity, ignoring the issues of internal disunity in French society that caused the radicalisation of the gunmen in the first place. Nigeria has the opposite problem, as Boko Haram controls what the Wall Street Journal called the primarily Muslim stronghold of opposition to the current president, Goodluck Jonathan, a Christian. Because of that, it’s politically beneficial to President Jonathan to keep that part of the country from voting in the upcoming Nigerian general election in February. However, there’s also criticism of how the world media ignores the tragedy in Nigeria and the threat of Boko Haram. Nigerian Catholic Archbishop Ignatius Ayau Kaigama (Archbishop of Jos) told the BBC World Service that with the international support and national unity of France after its terrorist attacks, “We need that spirit to be spread around. Not just when it happens in Europe, but when it happens in Nigeria, in Niger, in Cameroon”.

Lastly, there’s the issue of social media. Whereas France had the #JesuisCharlie campaign which, as CNN noted, made it possible for people from around the world to watch the events unfold from their tablets and smartphones, Nigeria’s remote towns aren’t always reached by mobile internet, and the previous social media campaign #BringBackOurGirls is only associated with disappointment, as social media activism failed to bring back the kidnapped girls. Furthermore, previous social media campaigns in Africa such as the Kony 2012 campaign to catch the Lord’s Resistance Army warlord Joseph Kony, initiated by the activist group Invisible Children only became associated with the group’s ulterior motive

Altogether, the problem of reporter access and the lack of social media coverage left the killing of over 2,000 people in Nigeria overshadowed by the attacks on Charlie Hebdo. France had those benefits as as well as a government that took advantage of the spotlight directed toward the attacks in an attempt to increase its popularity over the opposition, whereas in Nigeria, chaos and violence in an opposition stronghold appears to benefit the president.

14 January 2015

Sputnik International


Read More:

Trouble Brewing: West Turns Blind Eye to Boko Haram’s Bloody Massacre

Boko Haram Militants Seize Nigerian Town of Baga, Local Military Base: Reports

Boko Haram Launches Fresh Attack on Baga, Northeast Nigeria


Do black lives matter at all to the Affluent Effluent and their running dog media whores? It appears not… just sayin’…


Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.