Dear online community of Roma Virtual Network!
Since yesterday all the world is talking about the recent shooting at a Paris satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo. Noteworthy that the French Muslim Council (CFCM) in a statement sharply condemned the shooting at a Paris satirical weekly that left at least 12 people dead as a “barbaric” attack and “an assault on press freedom and democracy”.
The majority of voices show full sympathy with the victims of a killing. However, all todays Internet is full of conflicting commentaries regarding the reasons of this unfortunate event. There are extreme views too, and majority of them rather spontanious emotional. These debates happen these days among Roma too, and not only online. This trend is strengthened by the fact up to 40% of European Roma are Muslims and in such country as Turkey almost all Roma citizens. Taken into attention the peculiar situation of this part of Roma population who are affected by both, Anti-Tziganizm and Anti-Muslim hate I have to express my personal opinion on the tragic event in Paris:
Democracy is not about the freedom to insult someone. Even in secular democratic states the laws exist, which protect various ethnic, racial and religious groups from defamation. Of course, this part of legislation in many countries is not elaborated well, but it starts to work when people of Good Will intend to stop the hate (even when it is disguied as “satire”).
The staff of Charlie Hebdo (R.I.P.) had own story of so called “satiric” defamation of everything, including the defamation of all three monotheistic religions: Islam, Judaism and Christianity. In my opinion, if the representatives of faith communities would do their best in time to bring the editorial office of Charlie Hebdo to the court to answer for their hateful “satiric” trend, the the killings would not take place. Otherwise, what has happened simply serves numerous Islamophobes who are coming mostly from a secular background, serves to the interests of those who are looking for any reason to attack Islam and every Muslim person.
Some of such critics may not be hate-mongers, but “just” not open-minded people. If they will start the sincere dialogue with the ones whom they regard as “adherents of wrong religion” then they will realise that there are many good things about Islam and Umma (i.e. world Muslim community) that they did not know yet. They will also realise on how the perpetrators of that killing violated the norms of Islam and hurt the self-integrity of Muslims living in France. Of course, the ones who prefer blind hatred and mockery follow the path of some “satiric” publications. But the ones who want to achieve real civil Peace and mutual Understanding choose to listen the other side also.
Let`s stop attacking one another for “incorrect” personal views on the recent tragic event, but lets start analyze carefully the reasons of it. There is no reason to blame the victims in what has happened, there is no reason to justify the killers for what they have done, but the whole heavy athmosphere of Islamophobia deserves the criticism. This is the reason of a recent tragedy in Paris.
And lets hope, wish and pray that in the result of all this emotional worldwide debate regarding the event in Paris the humanity will learn the true respect to religions. And lets also wish peace to one another despite the difference in our opinions!
And if you have other or similar opinion please write it in this forum.
Respectfully yours,
Mr. Valery Novoselsky,
Executive Editor, Roma Virtual Network.
http://www.romavirtualnetwork.org
romadebates 
I am shocked about your opinion concerning the Paris attack. You use the word “hate” to describe the journalists, not the terrorists. So you are not doing what you are demanding yourself: “There is no reason to blame the victims in what has happened” – but blaming the victims is exactly what you are doing in your text. Satire is indispensable for every society, not something that needs to be brought before a court. There is a huge difference between criticizing a religious, authoritative system ( a critique which often goes hand in hand with taking sides with discriminated individuals) and hate.
Killing! who ever if not in war for our countries most be stop. my prayers our with the people of France. this is a terrorist attack ,and most be stop !
no one knows!
Dear Valery and Readers of Roma Virtual Network,
In my personal opinion the men who committed these murders were interested in one thing only: Committing spectacular violence.
It would be a mistake to give too much credence to their self-justifications. They represent violence and nothing more.
I am firmly convinced that if Charlie Hebdo had not attracted their attention, they would have found another pretext and target for their violence.
Time will tell whether this was their own idea or whether they were led to commit these murders by others who remain unseen.
Responsibility for these deaths lies with those who pulled the triggers and those who supplied them the weapons. Hopefully they will be brought to justice.
In solidarity,
Gwendolyn Albert
I don’t agree with you, Mr. Novoselsky. In a democratic society, there is a right to mock and criticize everything, including religions. Charlie Hebdo was mocking not only radical Muslims, but also Catholics, Jews, communists, liberals, fascists, nationalists… You may not agree with this kind of press, but nobody forced you to read this newspaper or to appreciate its caricatures.
Regarding the so-called islamophobia, I also believe that it is a fundamental right not to like any religion, including Islam. What is unacceptable is to spread intolerance or hate, and to hurt or kill anybody for his (absence of) religious beliefs. And if you look in the world, you must admit that at least 99% of people killed because of their religion are killed by a kind of perverted Muslims called Salafists, who are exterminating Shiites, Yazidis, Christians and moderate Sunnis in Syria, Irak, Nigeria, Mali, Pakistan… I don’t know the background of the Paris but they are very likely influenced by Salafists. This ideology – supported by petrodollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar – should be firmly fought, not the so-called islamophobia of Charlie Hebdo.
I am sure that the vast majority of Roma, who suffered so much from intolerance and keep a very tolerant praxis of their religion, support this point of view.
I am really tired of the individualization which is happening all the time since charlie hebdo has been attacked, yes it is cruel to kill people because they have insulted you and I might understand that this is something which is shocking in western europe, but we have to see the context in which these attacks happened. I really agree with this article here which gives a wonderful contextualization of the attacks -> https://medium.com/@asgharbukhari/charlie-hebdo-this-attack-was-nothing-to-do-with-free-speech-it-was-about-war-26aff1c3e998
there is a war going on against muslims and it is horrific to see how this terroristic attacks (from both sides) are being shown in the media. There is too less outcry of all the victims killed by French (neo)colonial politics or by the 5 attacks on mosques which had followed the charlie hebdo killings, there is actually no real intervention against right wing extremism raising in Europe and we Rroma, who are always the first target of such generalisations based on individual stories should really be solidary with the muslims who again are forced to justify themselves, hide themselves and take even more care when going out. The story and its discussion how it is led, does not at all entail a way to a solidary society. I don’t see any opposition in condemning racist caricatures and condemning the killing of people. But I do see the risk to act as if freedom of expression was upheld in Western Europe and that it has to be defended. There is only limited freedom of expression also in Western European Media, what serves the system will be published, what does not serve the system is to be found only in the work of resistant minds and they might even face serious threats due to their publications. So please stop this awful debate on the question if freedom expression has been attacked and start constructing one beforehand by giving a voice to all of the people who were not heard … we don’t need blood on the streets to see that it is wrong to foster imagined barriers….
Here is the comment I sent you some days ago on Roma Network :
The right to blaspheme
Dear friend, I read what you wrote and which I will summarize it in a few words : of course, it is a great crime, but they have been asking for it. I think it is a bit short and I’ll write why. But first I want to say that I have the greatest respect for my Muslim brothers and their religion and that I do not confuse them with those murderers whom they are often the first victims.
When in France, King Louis XVI signed the first “Declaration of the Human and Citizen Rights” the Pope informed him that there were no “Human Rights” but only “Rights of God” and therefore threatened to excommunicate him. However, the Republic passed on, as indeed, therefore claims stating these “Rights of God” are expressed by men, fallible, sinful and imperfect. Who, for example in the Christian world believe in papal infallibility when Orthodox and Protestants have never believed in ?
The true religiosity indeed begins with a great humility and, if not loving his neighbor, at least a great kindness, a great compassion. If we are made in the image of God who is great and merciful, so if there is a crime against Him, the authors deserve first our pity and our mercy. Pretend to judge instead of God, is first commit a great sin, that of pride.
But there is worse. It is in fact worse than blasphemy to be judge in His place by treating Him as a weak child who needs our protection. If He is omnipotent and omniscient, He does not need the weakness of our strengths and human judgments to get justice. To believe that He could be to be injured or even just scratched by a comment or a drawing, is really to insult Him.
French king Louis XIV had understood that when in 1666 he ordered that blasphemy no longer deserves death.
Two days before the crimes committed in Paris, a Saudi twenty year old boy received its first 50 lashes in public. The executioner stopped at this number “not that he die.” He will receive the other 950 during 19 sessions. He was also sentenced ten years in jail and will have to pay 226,000 euros fine. Indeed, he was convicted of blasphemy and apostasy for on his blog he treated Islam, Christianity and Judaism as equivalent religions. And this in defiance of all international agreements and the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”.
I read here and there about fifty Muslim countries which want to register blasphemy as a crime in the Charter of the United Nations.
I think the honor of humanity would be the contrary, whether one is a believer or atheist, to recognize this right to blasphemy as a Human Right by the UN.
That’s what, my brother, I wished to say.
Today, two days later, I will add some words. Where blasphemy begins ? I saw the last picture on the last issue of Charlie Hebdo. Who said it was a portrayal of prophet Muhammad ? The cartoonist wrote nothing about this. Is the green background itself a possible blasphemy ? Maybe with people who think that the simple face of a woman is an insult. Indeed, this one who dare recognize Muhammad Himself in this portrayal blasphemes in thought.
Ame sare sam Charlie
Nous sommes tous Charlie
We are all Charlie