
Notepad ++ hacked for Je Suis Charlie comments(web archive link) - Trisell
https://web.archive.org/web/20150112220650/http://notepad-plus-plus.org/
======
sosuke
I'll never understand that logic, how does coming to the aide and support of a
group that was brutally attacked mean that they are in turn attacking the
group that did the attacking? The attack on Charlie was not defensive,
defacing the Notepad++ site is not defensive. Defending yourself doesn't mean
attacking, and certainly not harming, other people. You only draw more
hostility and attacks.

Edit: I am also curious, the language indicates that the hackers feel it is
countries versus religion. The actions of someone who believes in a religion
do not define the religion. If I do a terrorist act and say it was for my
religion, that does not make my religion a terrorist, but it does make me a
terrorist. Do the perpetrators of these attacks feel it is countries against
religion, or is that just the shield they want to use.

~~~
pen2l
I'll play 'devil's advocate' here for a moment. I'll be sacrificing a lot of
internet points, but I'm not in a great position to begin with. :)

Do let me pre-emptively say: I unequivocally condemn the recent killings of
the cartoonists. I unequivocally support the right of anyone to say anything.

Okay, so there is something to consider here: indeed there are now more than a
billion Muslims in the world who would not have killed these cartoonists, or
even approve of the act of killing these cartoonists (I understand some will
take issue with the latter part of my statement, this is just my current
reading). Insofar as the 'I am Charlie' statement can be interpreted as
approval of the supposedly offending cartoons, the statement could be said to
be needlessly confrontational. It's turning things into a combative us (non-
Muslims) vs them (Muslims) orientation. Look no further than this very cartoon
for proof of this -- this is how these Muslim hacktivists interpreted
Notepad++'s 'I am Charlie' stance.

I don't think this is strictly a freedom of speech issue. I saw a good example
of this in a Reddit comment: when you enrage someone by calling them racist
epithets, and they strike you back ... are the rest of you going to take the
racist's side by repeating the racist epithet that invoked the retaliation?
Mohammad is a very sacred symbol to Muslims, re-publishing offending material
(and similarly approving of the cartoons by saying "I am Charlie") is just
needlessly insulting and distressing the plenty of other moderate Muslims. The
more this is done, the more those moderate Muslims will feel pressured and
start to feel the need to also take a position... and guess whose side they
will incline towards? They're surely not going to just throw away their
religion, they'll probably verge toward an extremist position.

I'm only suggesting that the 'I am Charlie' sloganeering is a little too
hastily thunk, a little too unthought. Of course absolutely everyone should
have the _right_ to say such a thing, but a mature and reasonable person would
practice caution before saying it. I do admit though, that it's a bit of a
challenge packing a sentiment like "I don't think Charlie cartoonists should
have been killed, they should have the right to say or mock anyone, but I do
generally disapprove of content that's racist, antisemitic, holocaust-denying,
sexist, etc." into a nice 3-5 word long slogan.

~~~
seabee
I don't think the sloganeering is hastily thought, I don't think it is thought
at all. It doesn't need to be. Freedom of expression ingrained in Western
culture and you would find it very difficult to believe someone should be
executed for expressing an opinion. Fined, jailed, maybe, but never executed.

To think of 'I am Charlie' as supporting the cartoons themselves would require
you divorce the victims from their fate. Essentially, you'd have to make a
leap of logic, and focus on the selfish part (i.e. they offended Muslims) and
at this point you no longer deal with rational argument.

Essentially the devil's advocate argument is 'a mature and reasonable person
should practice caution before saying anything that may be taken out of
context by any party that is sufficiently upset', which is nigh impossible.

~~~
dummyfellow
>Freedom of expression ingrained in Western culture

Not so much(it is only for things westeros are not emotional of)

[http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/3/5578984/mozilla-ceo-
resigns...](http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/3/5578984/mozilla-ceo-resigns-amid-
controversy-over-donation-to-anti-gay)

[http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/02/tech/social-
media/facebook...](http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/02/tech/social-
media/facebook-threat-carter/)

[http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/john-galliano-fired-
anti...](http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/john-galliano-fired-anti-semitic-
comment-teaches-parsons-article-1.1325315)

[http://greece.greekreporter.com/2014/03/02/greek-doctor-
arre...](http://greece.greekreporter.com/2014/03/02/greek-doctor-arrested-for-
inciting-hatred-and-pro-nazi-beliefs/)

~~~
LordDelacroix
Such is the scourge that is Political Correctness. Take heed, this scourge
will bring about the undoing of Western Civilization.

If you can not call things by their true colors you have nothing and will lose
all you thought you had.

------
hk__2

        > Because the last notepad++ version (6.7.4) named "JE SUIS CHARLIE" !
        > So you think that Islam is terrorist !
    

I don’t understand the transition between these two lines.

You’ll also note the space before punctuation marks, which is typical of
French speakers writing in English (e.g. “something !” instead of
“something!”). This is not a surprise, since those who defaced the site claim
to be from Tunisia, a country where most of the population speak French.

~~~
agumonkey
Are you sure about the punctuation argument ?

~~~
dguaraglia
I've never seen that, and I have a bunch of French friends I communicate with
in writing in a regular basis.

~~~
hk__2
I'm French, and I see it everywhere. You won't notice it if your friends are
fluent in English, only beginners do that.

~~~
agumonkey
Fair enough, I asked because I naturally write "word!" without knowing proper
English syntax and thought it was a naive reflex everybody would have.

------
k-mcgrady
Slight OT but I think relevant. The latest cover of the Charlie Hebdo magazine
has been published [1].

[1] [http://www.liberation.fr/societe/2015/01/12/mahomet-en-
une-d...](http://www.liberation.fr/societe/2015/01/12/mahomet-en-une-du-
charlie-hebdo-de-mercredi_1179193)

~~~
yaddayadda
Article translated to English :
[https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev...](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.liberation.fr%2Fsociete%2F2015%2F01%2F12%2Fmahomet-
en-une-du-charlie-hebdo-de-mercredi_1179193&edit-text=)

------
sevkih
I hope they deface
[http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/](http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) next,
possibly improving the current design and pissing of the STALLMAN, drawing the
first blood. I'll tell ya folks, when #JeSuisGnu is trending, full wrath of
Stallman will be unleashed, then and only then the world will know real
religious fanaticism. ISIS aint got shit on alt.religion.emacs

------
jevinskie
From the archive of the hacked site: "So you think that Islam is terrorist !"

From the explanation of the "Je suis Charlie" release note: "For this reason,
Je suis Charlie, not because I endorse everything they published, but because
I cherish the right to speak out freely without risk even when it offends
others."

Clearly the Notepad++ team is blanket targeting Islam. /sarcasm

------
kevinchau
When will hackers learn web design beyond geocities?

~~~
savanaly
I know right, we have bootstrap for a reason!

------
hetman
Samuel Huntington's thesis about the Clash of Civilisations has been
thoroughly criticised since he originally proposed it, and yet in some ways
the world is increasingly taking the shape he imagined. It would have been
wise to treat it as a warning and take precautionary measurers instead;
perhaps it is not too late.

~~~
ddod
It was criticized on academic and theoretical grounds. In his field
(International Relations) there are hundreds if not thousands of people all
producing a lot of dialogue and research relating to overarching models for
how states interact. They've been at this for a very long time.

If you want a book deal, though, you ditch all of this work and just paint
broad, easily-digestible strokes over everything. In this case, he's throwing
social constructivist research into norms and sub/super-state influencers out
the window and claiming the world runs on civilizations. You can probably
think through how this might not be the case by considering the role of
economics, individuals, and strategic alliances in international politics.

------
oceandon
After reading comments about this topic, I see a pattern, people blaming
religion or/and country for atrocities on human beings. We are human beings
first, so trying to justify killing your fellow human being because of
religion/country or for wealth suggests we have lost our way and soon we will
have another world war and many more after that. Let’s learn to forgive and
instead of killing lets have dialogue

------
gaelow
JE SUIS CHARLIE is a movement that condemns killing. It is a movement for
freedom and freedom of expression. Some people seem to be pissed off because
the killings that started the movement were not the ones that happened before
or will happen later. That's plain stupid.

------
EliRivers
Little children, watching their heroes murder people and then playing at being
big men by writing on the internet. Defacing something so amateurishly that if
I stuck it on my fridge people would ask if my five year old child did it. To
be taken about as seriously.

~~~
_mgr
Careful. These "Little Children" are showing us more and more how violent and
ruthless they can be. And the arrogance of your end statement reinforces their
point. Clearly English isn't their first language yet you belittle them and
call them children. You said it best, big man, writing on the internet.

~~~
EliRivers
_Careful. These "Little Children" are showing us more and more how violent and
ruthless they can be._

They defaced a webpage. I don't consider that to be very violent. In a
fistfight, I'll take a club with a nail in it over the awesome power of
defacing a webpage every time.

I do not belittle them for a poor grasp of English (which, actually, is not
very poor). I belittle them because they defaced a webpage, and with a very
childish message. It says little more than "I was here".

------
kungfooguru
Everyone seems to be missing the point. They list terrible atrocities that
don't get even close to the same outcry from the world as the attacks in
Paris.

~~~
mieses
The hackers should have also listed the Battle of Tours (732) and the Battle
of Vienna (1683) where many Muslims were killed by insensitive Europeans.
Where's the outcry about that?

tl;dr - You're confused about the definition of terrorism.

~~~
gonvaled
State terrorism, anyone?

Sure not, it is not terrorism if you get the right do define it!

~~~
mieses
terrorism or not terrorism? [ ] 9/11 [ ] US drone attacks [ ] Charlie Hebdo [
] Pearl Harbor [ ] Hiroshima [ ] mugging [ ] insult

Neither you nor I get the "right" to redefine words as we see fit after they
have been defined. Invent another word. "State terrorism" could be a rather
contentious term for "war" and calls into question your motives.

------
Exuma
So idiotic. Why do you need to go about defacing the site of a random text
editor. I'd be pissed, but not as pissed if it were vim.org ;0

------
noddingham
This post reminds me of the good old days of the attrition.org mirror, not
sure how it's relevant for HN though.

