As IF Times

link The power of the pen: Cartoonists worldwide react to the Charlie Hebdo attack | euronews, world news.

Predictably, this most recent terror attack has drawn sympathy from all quarters condemning the brutality and assault on free speech in a civilized society.  As is the pattern, crowds of people worldwide hold empathetic vigils in support of the victims and to protest the muzzling of free expression.

It’s all well meaning, but…to what good?  Of course people abhor senseless violence.  Of course people want freedom of speech and expression; at least in the western world.  It’s highly doubtful that the perpetrators and backers of the heinous deeds are going to be swayed by crowds of people carrying candles and signs.  In the aftermath of the deaths of the Charlie Hebdo satirists, cartoonists worldwide have taken to pen poignant and moving tributes to the courage of their fallen brethren.   Interestingly, very few publications have taken to publish the very cartoons which allegedly caused the deaths of the Charlie Hebdo editors.

The irony is stark.  Claims of cartoonists and journalists to not be silenced by these attacks are met with almost complete absence of what the offending cartoons were.  If news outlets were truly outraged and defiant, we’d see the offending cartoons on the front page of papers worldwide.   The exception is the Dutch publication Berlingske, which has republished the offending images.  But what about the big papers of the ‘free world’?

The reality is, the propaganda war is won…and not by the good guys.  In the 21st century, with all that civilization has accomplished, with all that is known, people are still being held hostage by radical exponents of third century beliefs.  From eyeglasses to airplanes; agriculture to spaceflight; medicines to engineering; all have progressed with the movement of civilization.  But, some think that women should still be covered from head to toe, have no education and be subservient chattel.  That men should be devoutly obessiant to arbitrary rules that applied when people chased animals around with sticks.

But that’s not even the insane part.  The insane part is that the prevailing wisdom espoused by ‘leaders’  is that society at large should not inflame the sensibilities of such nutters.   It’s not an outrageous leap of logic to expect that the scope of offensive images will include pictures of people eating a pork slider, of people laughing or even a Sears catalogue.

This has nothing to do with religious sensibilities. It has everything to do with criminals bent on gaining control on their terms.  Appeasing makes as much sense as reasoning with a rabid skunk. Groups that insist that people be dragged back into the dark ages of human existence deserve no special consideration or voice by modern society.   Nor should those that apologize for them.

link Sony Cancels Theatrical Release for ‘The Interview’ on Christmas | Variety.

All I can say is, where were the hackers when they released any movie in the past 10 years starring Will Ferrell or Jim Carey? Or any movie featuring Eddie Murphy, Oprah or Whoopi? How about any of the teen horror flicks featuring chain saws, isolated hotels, talking dummies and supernatural crap. This kind of carnage has been inflicted on the American public for years and until now, no one had the guts to stand up to Hollywood and say, “no more!”

Given the success of the James Bond franchise, with their depictions of evil
Eastern Bloc villains, it’s a wonder no one thought of doing what the North Koreans are allegedly doing today. Obviously the Koreans are a tougher audience. In this particular case, apart from the fact that they have criminally hacked Sony and are using extortionist methods, they are saving us from another Seth Rogan epic, so there is a kernel of redemption there.  But isn’t it a bit galling that the evil mastermind purportedly behind this extortion resembles Elmer Fudd with a bad haircut?

It’s interesting to note that the reason Sony decided to pull the showing of “The Interview” is based not on threats of violence per se.  It is really based on liability.  In effect, the fear of lawsuits by people who may be hurt by going to the theatre is more of an issue than people who may genuinely be harmed.  So the real fear is with the American legal system. It doesn’t take an evil genius to determine that this model can be used to attack all sorts of commercial operations.

What has happened to America in the aftermath of “The Greatest Generation”? Can anyone imagine this scenario being played out in the 1940’s? The entire mindset of American society has devolved from “Bring it!” in the face of adversity to “Bring me a latte” in our neutered times.  Over the generations, people have been lulled into believing that “somebody” has the obligation to make sure people are safe; that some authority is charged with protecting people against all harm.  We’ve seen this stupidity through the grotesque machinations of the TSA at airports.  As a society, collective risk tolerance has fallen to comical levels.  But it’s not because people are less brave, it’s because of legal liability in the event of misfortune.  Lawyers again.

Eventually, people will be allowed to go to the theaters again, but it may be after the implementation of metal and perhaps body scanners and dogs at the ticket windows.  The tickets will be 3 times the size they are now because they will need the room to print all the disclaimers of risk and acceptance of such.   That still doesn’t take away the risk of viewing a crappy movie.