The latest Jesus and Mo:

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Via Anonymous:

Anonymous  ‏@AnonRRD 10m10 minutes ago
#CharlieHebdo: Cartoonists across the world are uniting against bloodshed and violence. pic.twitter.com/hjWhzvGChF

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Via Jenan Moussa:

Paris tonight. What a pic. @akhbar #CharlieHebdo

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Nick Cohen in the Spectator quotes the (paywalled) Financial Times on Charlie Hebdo:

Charlie Hebdo is a bastion of the French tradition of hard-hitting satire. It has a long record of mocking, baiting and needling Muslims.

Two years ago the magazine published a 65-page strip cartoon book portraying the Prophet’s life. And this week it gave special coverage to Soumission (“Submission”), a new novel by Michel Houellebecq, the idiosyncratic author, which depicts France in the grip of an Islamic regime led by a Muslim president.

This is not in the slightest to condone the murderers, who must be caught and punished, or to suggest that freedom of expression should not extend to satirical portrayals of religion. It is merely to say that some common sense would be useful at publications such as Charlie Hebdo, and Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten, which purport to strike a blow for freedom when they provoke Muslims.

This is not to suggest that freedom of expression should not extend to satirical portrayals of religion, it’s merely to say that freedom of expression should not extend to satirical portrayals of religion. Or, to put it another way, it’s not to suggest that freedom of expression should not extend to satirical portrayals of religion, it’s merely to say that no one should actually use that freedom of expression. You can have it, if you insist, but you can’t avail yourself of it.

Nick’s comment is acidic:

Does the Financial Times have subeditors? Did no one spot that, having begun by saying that it does not want to condone murder, the Financial Times moved in two sentences to saying that Charlie Hebdo’s satirists have provoked their own deaths. Apparently, they ‘purport’ to believe in freedom of speech – the hypocrites. If only they had had the ‘common sense’ not to ‘provoke’ clerical fascism, then clerical fascists would not have come for them.

Surely that’s enough “freedom” for anyone.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

The Australian shares some cartoons in response to the murders at Charlie Hebdo.

David Pope’s is sharp.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Taslima has a connection to Charlie Hebdo.

taslima nasreen @taslimanasreen · 7h7 hours ago

Charlie Hebdo has been supporting my freedom of expression. http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Charlie-Hebdo-N-120-Taslima-Nasreen-au-pays-/290593052613 …

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

More photos, via a reply to a tweet of Taslima’s.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Via Agence France-Presse on Twitter –

People hold signs reading “I am Charlie” at the Place de la Republique in Paris. #Photo by Joel Saget #CharlieHebdo

Many many people.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Salman Rushdie made a statement. Via the Wall Street Journal:

“Religion, a mediaeval form of unreason, when combined with modern weaponry becomes a real threat to our freedoms. This religious totalitarianism has caused a deadly mutation in the heart of Islam and we see the tragic consequences in Paris today. I stand with Charlie Hebdo, as we all must, to defend the art of satire, which has always been a force for liberty and against tyranny, dishonesty and stupidity. ‘Respect for religion’ has become a code phrase meaning ‘fear of religion.’ Religions, like all other ideas, deserve criticism, satire, and, yes, our fearless disrespect.”  –Salman Rushdie

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Via HuffPostUK on Twitter – the four Charlie Hebdo cartoonists murdered:

- Charb
– Cabu
– Tignous
– Georges Wolinski

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Also in the news – the Denver Post reports:

COLORADO SPRINGS —A bomb detonated at an NAACP chapter on Tuesday left little damage to the building, but the loud boom that resonated through the historic neighborhood of small homes has also sounded across the nation.

As word spread of the blast, anger and questions spread with it across social media, on Twitter through the trend #NAACPBombing, and news headlines. The national president of the NAACP, the organization that appears to have been the target of the Colorado Springs blast, said he is thankful no one was hurt.

“We remain vigilant,” Cornell Brooks, the president of the Baltimore-based organization, said in a statement.

That’s horrible too. As a matter of luck, the bomb physically injured no one and did little material damage, but it certainly could have, and was intended to. A can of gasoline was placed next to the bomb, but it failed to ignite.

According to the FBI, officials are seeking a “potential person of interest,” described as a balding white male, about 40 years old. Neighbors saw a man matching his description flee after the explosion.

“He may be driving a 2000 or older model dirty, white pick-up truck with paneling, a dark colored bed liner, open tailgate, and a missing or covered license plate,” the FBI said in a statement.

Addendum: he’s probably heavily armed. Just a guess.

The NAACP informed other offices across the nation of the events in Colorado Springs.

Henry Allen Jr., the NAACP chapter president, told The Gazette the explosion was strong enough to knock items off the walls.

“We’ll move on,” Allen told the newspaper. “This won’t deter us from doing the job we want to do in the community.”

Be safe.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Katha Pollitt wrote a piece in 2012 titled “Blasphemy is Good for You.”

As I write, mobs all over the world are rioting about an amateurish video portraying Muhammad as a horny buffoon. Death toll so far: at least thirty, including Christopher Stevens, US ambassador to Libya, and three embassy staffers. Not to be outdone, Pakistan’s railways minister announced he would pay $100,000 to anyone who murdered the videomaker, and added, “I call upon these countries and say: Yes, freedom of expression is there, but you should make laws regarding people insulting our Prophet. And if you don’t, then the future will be extremely dangerous.” More riots, embassy closings and a possible assassination attempt or two followed the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo’s retaliatory publication of cartoons of Muhammad naked. To bring it all full circle, an Iranian foundation has raised to $3.3 million the reward it’s offering for the murder of Salman Rushdie. (Just out and highly recommended: Joseph Anton, Rushdie’s humane and heroic memoir of his years in hiding.)

Full circle.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Via BBC Breaking News on the Charlie Hebdo massacre:

17:59

Guardian cartoonist Steve Bell tells BBC News channel: “We’ve got to stand up for the right to take the piss out of these monsters, these idiots, these fools, these posturing maniacs who strut around in their black gear as a kind of death cult trying to frighten us all.”

18:08

The Globe and Mail’s Mark MacKinnon took this picture at the Place de la Republique in Paris, where crowds are gathering to express solidarity with the magazine:

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

#JeSuisCharlie

Freedom of expression is making ink flow, not making blood flow.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

CFI has a statement on the Charlie Hebdo murders.

In response to the murders of journalists at the French magazine Charlie Hebdo by terrorists in Paris today, Center for Inquiry president and CEO Ronald A. Lindsay issued this statement:

We are heartbroken by the unthinkable and cowardly attack at the magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris today, and outraged that such a barbaric act was a response to journalists and satirists exercising their right to free expression.

As publishers of Free Inquiry, the first (and for some time, the only) U.S. publication willing to publish the cartoons of Muhammad that sparked riots in 2005 after they appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, we stand in resolute solidarity with the people of Charlie Hebdo, and all those writers, thinkers, and satirists who know that no idea or individual ought to be immune from criticism, and have the courage to point out the flaws and fallacies of even the most deeply-held beliefs.

As a show of support for free expression and the staff of Charlie Hebdo, CFI plans to prominently display on our website (http://www.centerforinquiry.net) the cartoon of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi that apparently was one of the motivations for the attack. We will not be cowed by the savagery of those few who would like to see the world dragged back to the Dark Ages, who will kill to protect their backward ideologies from criticism, and we will continue to fight for the right of all people to dissent, to satirize, and to freely speak their minds.

The original Free Inquiry article with the Muhammed cartoons is available at bit.ly/CFIDanishCartoon

The Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi cartoon is on the main page.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Bonjour.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

The BBC reports:

Gunmen have shot dead 12 people at the Paris office of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in an apparent militant Islamist attack.

Four of the magazine’s well-known cartoonists, including its editor, were among those killed, as well as two police officers.

This is a fucking disaster.

Witnesses said they heard the gunmen shouting “We have avenged the Prophet Muhammad” and “God is Great” in Arabic (“Allahu Akbar”).

The number of attackers was initially reported to be two, but French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve later said security services were hunting three “criminals”. He said that Paris had been placed on the highest alert.

Footage taken from a rooftop in Paris shows two gunmen firing shots
Charlie Hebdo editor Stephane Charbonnier, 47, had received death threats in the past and was living under police protection.

French media have named the three other cartoonists killed in the attack as Cabu, Tignous and Wolinski, as well as Charlie Hebdo contributor and French economist Bernard Maris.

The attack took place during the magazine’s daily editorial meeting.

At least four people were critically wounded in the attack.

The satirical weekly has courted controversy in the past with its irreverent take on news and current affairs. It was firebombed in November 2011 a day after it carried a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad.

It didn’t “court controversy” you cowardly assholes.

We’re all fucking doomed.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

NPR did this piece on AA last March but I’m not sure I saw it then, and if I did I forgot about it, so I’m looking at it either again or for the first time.

The punchline? For 90% of people who try it, it fails.

AA and the many 12-step groups it inspired have become the country’s go-to solution for addiction in all of its forms. These recovery programs are mandated by drug courts, prescribed by doctors and widely praised by reformed addicts.

Dr. Lance Dodes sees a big problem with that. The psychiatrist has spent more than 20 years studying and treating addiction. His latest book on the subject is The Sober Truth: Debunking the Bad Science Behind 12-Step Programs and the Rehab Industry.

Dodes tells NPR’s Arun Rath that 12-step recovery simply doesn’t work, despite anecdotes about success.

Because guess what: we don’t hear the anecdotes about failure.

There is a large body of evidence now looking at AA success rate, and the success rate of AA is between 5 and 10 percent. Most people don’t seem to know that because it’s not widely publicized. … There are some studies that have claimed to show scientifically that AA is useful. These studies are riddled with scientific errors and they say no more than what we knew to begin with, which is that AA has probably the worst success rate in all of medicine.

It’s not only that AA has a 5 to 10 percent success rate; if it was successful and was neutral the rest of the time, we’d say OK. But it’s harmful to the 90 percent who don’t do well. And it’s harmful for several important reasons. One of them is that everyone believes that AA is the right treatment. AA is never wrong, according to AA. If you fail in AA, it’s you that’s failed.

So that’s crap for morale, self-respect, hope – lots of things. Bad news.

The reason that the 5 to 10 percent do well in AA actually doesn’t have to do with the 12 steps themselves; it has to do with the camaraderie. It’s a supportive organization with people who are on the whole kind to you, and it gives you a structure. Some people can make a lot of use of that. And to its credit, AA describes itself as a brotherhood rather than a treatment.

So as you can imagine, a few people given that kind of setting are able to change their behavior at least temporarily, maybe permanently. But most people can’t deal with their addiction, which is deeply driven, by just being in a brotherhood.

And it’s a terrible shame that AA has such a great reputation; it’s tragic that most people think it does work, and that courts tell addicts to go there.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

From Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature, chapter 8, Inner Demons, section on dominance:

The psychologists Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto have proposed that people, to varying degrees, harbor a motive they call social dominance, though a more intuitive term is tribalism: the desire that social groups be organized into a hierarchy, generally with one’s own group dominant over the others.¹ A social dominance orientation, they show, inclines people to a sweeping array of opinions and values, including patriotism, racism, fate, karma, caste, national destiny, militarism, toughness on crime, and defensiveness of existing arrangements of authority and inequality. An orientation away from social dominance, in contrast, inclines people to humanism, socialism, feminism, universal rights, progressivism, and the egalitarian and pacifist themes in the Christian Bible.

¹Social dominance: Pratto et al., 2006; Sidanius & Pratto, 2009.

It interests me what a thorough match that is for me (and, probably, most of you, or you wouldn’t be reading this blog). I dislike all the items in the first list, and favor all the items in the second (except for the Xian bible part). I do dislike social dominance and/or tribalism, and the qualities and “virtues” that apparently go with it.

I think it would be a better world if more people did.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Some of Bill Cosby’s accusers are fighting back.

Two women who have accused Bill Cosby of historical sex offences have joined a defamation action against the star.

The original case was filed in December by Tamara Green, who has accused Cosby of assaulting her in the 1970s.

The two new plaintiffs are Therese Serignese and Linda Traitz.

The women claim the comedian publicly called them liars through statements issued by his representatives. Cosby is facing a series of accusations, which he has called “unsubstantiated”.

The women’s lawyer, Joseph Cammarata, said the civil action allows them to have their allegations heard now criminal statutes of limitation have expired.

…

Ms Green, who first spoke out regarding her allegations in 2005, said in her claim that [Cosby’s publicist David} Brokaw had made statements intended to expose her to public contempt and ridicule.

Well that’s what you do when you’re a rich and famous tv star accused of drugging and raping a slew of women – you do your best to expose them to public contempt and ridicule, by way of discrediting their testimony.

Ms Serignese and Ms Traitz, from Florida, allege in the amended complaint that when they came forward in November last year, Mr Singer issued responses for Cosby that said they were lying.

Best known as Dr Cliff Huxtable on The Cosby Show from 1984 to 1992, the 77-year-old comedian is facing a number of allegations dating back to the 1970s.

The accusations, which he has described as “fantastical” and “uncorroborated”, have led to some of his stand-up shows being called off and the cancellation of some TV projects.

Cosby has not been charged in connection with any of the allegations.

I look forward to hundreds of Irish blog posts explaining that the police have not arrested Cosby and therefore the BBC is smearing him.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)