Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 99
Like Tree151Likes

Thread: At least 12 dead after shooting at Paris magazine

  1. #76
    Elite Member faithanne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    On the Hellmouth
    Posts
    12,340

    Default

    TL;DR but ordinary Muslims are as responsible for terrorism as ordinary Christians are responsible for abortion clinics being blown up and doctors gunned down. There's just as much hate speech in the Christian bible so however a bunch of radicals choose to interpret a very old rule book, doesn't mean the rest of the congregation would do the same or even agree.
    sluce, greysfang, Beeyotch and 6 others like this.
    "You're going to die tomorrow, Lord Bolton. Sleep well."



  2. #77
    Elite Member LaFolie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    in my dreams
    Posts
    5,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A*O View Post
    The media is appeasing by not saying/printing the self-evident truth about the "religion of peace" for fear of provoking exactly the kind of violent attack the brave French journos suffered precisely because they DID dare to speak out. Many news outlets don't even use the "M" or "I" word in case their own offices get firebombed. It's OK to mock Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Atheists - and it's important that we do - but Allah forbid we DARE question the methods and and motives of jihadi Muslims and where they get their ideas from.

    Politicians and other community leaders appease in the same way. They spout empty PC platitudes for fear of being "unpopular". Even the President of France has said these atrocities are "nothing to do with Islam". Oh yes it is and if he had the balls to say so he'd probably increase his cherished popularity rather than lose it. President Obama has also said that we must be very careful not to offend the followers of the Prophet but doesn't apparently have a problem with other religions being criticised or mocked.


    The West must stand up for freedom—and acknowledge the link between Islamists’ political ideology and their religious beliefs.
    By
    Ayaan Hirsi Ali
    Jan. 7, 2015 6:08 p.m. ET
    After the horrific massacre Wednesday at the French weekly satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, perhaps the West will finally put away its legion of useless tropes trying to deny the relationship between violence and radical Islam.

    This was not an attack by a mentally deranged, lone-wolf gunman. This was not an “un-Islamic” attack by a bunch of thugs—the perpetrators could be heard shouting that they were avenging the Prophet Muhammad. Nor was it spontaneous. It was planned to inflict maximum damage, during a staff meeting, with automatic weapons and a getaway plan. It was designed to sow terror, and in that it has worked.

    The West is duly terrified. But it should not be surprised.

    If there is a lesson to be drawn from such a grisly episode, it is that what we believe about Islam truly doesn’t matter. This type of violence, jihad, is what they, the Islamists, believe.

    There are numerous calls to violent jihad in the Quran. But the Quran is hardly alone. In too much of Islam, jihad is a thoroughly modern concept. The 20th-century jihad “bible,” and an animating work for many Islamist groups today, is “The Quranic Concept of War,” a book written in the mid-1970s by Pakistani Gen. S.K. Malik. He argues that because God, Allah, himself authored every word of the Quran, the rules of war contained in the Quran are of a higher caliber than the rules developed by mere mortals.

    In Malik’s analysis of Quranic strategy, the human soul—and not any physical battlefield—is the center of conflict. The key to victory, taught by Allah through the military campaigns of the Prophet Muhammad, is to strike at the soul of your enemy. And the best way to strike at your enemy’s soul is through terror. Terror, Malik writes, is “the point where the means and the end meet.” Terror, he adds, “is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose.”

    Those responsible for the slaughter in Paris, just like the man who killed the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh in 2004, are seeking to impose terror. And every time we give in to their vision of justified religious violence, we are giving them exactly what they want.

    In Islam, it is a grave sin to visually depict or in any way slander the Prophet Muhammad. Muslims are free to believe this, but why should such a prohibition be forced on nonbelievers? In the U.S., Mormons didn’t seek to impose the death penalty on those who wrote and produced “The Book of Mormon,” a satirical Broadway sendup of their faith. Islam, with 1,400 years of history and some 1.6 billion adherents, should be able to withstand a few cartoons by a French satirical magazine. But of course deadly responses to cartoons depicting Muhammad are nothing new in the age of jihad.

    Moreover, despite what the Quran may teach, not all sins can be considered equal. The West must insist that Muslims, particularly members of the Muslim diaspora, answer this question: What is more offensive to a believer—the murder, torture, enslavement and acts of war and terrorism being committed today in the name of Muhammad, or the production of drawings and films and books designed to mock the extremists and their vision of what Muhammad represents?

    To answer the late Gen. Malik, our soul in the West lies in our belief in freedom of conscience and freedom of expression. The freedom to express our concerns, the freedom to worship who we want, or not to worship at all—such freedoms are the soul of our civilization. And that is precisely where the Islamists have attacked us. Again.

    How we respond to this attack is of great consequence. If we take the position that we are dealing with a handful of murderous thugs with no connection to what they so vocally claim, then we are not answering them. We have to acknowledge that today’s Islamists are driven by a political ideology, an ideology embedded in the foundational texts of Islam. We can no longer pretend that it is possible to divorce actions from the ideals that inspire them.

    This would be a departure for the West, which too often has responded to jihadist violence with appeasement. We appease the Muslim heads of government who lobby us to censor our press, our universities, our history books, our school curricula. They appeal and we oblige. We appease leaders of Muslim organizations in our societies. They ask us not to link acts of violence to the religion of Islam because they tell us that theirs is a religion of peace, and we oblige.

    What do we get in return? Kalashnikovs in the heart of Paris. The more we oblige, the more we self-censor, the more we appease, the bolder the enemy gets.

    There can only be one answer to this hideous act of jihad against the staff of Charlie Hebdo. It is the obligation of the Western media and Western leaders, religious and lay, to protect the most basic rights of freedom of expression, whether in satire on any other form. The West must not appease, it must not be silenced. We must send a united message to the terrorists: Your violence cannot destroy our soul.

    Ms. Hirsi Ali, a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, is the author of “Infidel” (2007). Her latest book, “Heretic: The Case for a Muslim Reformation,” will be published in April by HarperCollins
    Hear! Hear!

  3. #78
    Elite Member ikmccall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wilmington, Delaware, United States
    Posts
    4,311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    The female terrorist got away, though. How the heck did she get past what must have been a massive police cordon?
    I wonder if she was even in the building? Maybe she was in another building acting as a look-out.

  4. #79
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,316

    Default

    I think that it is believed she sneaked out during the melee after the other person was shot. And that she was pretending to be a hostage. If so, that was a serious lapse on the commandos' part.

    ETA - I do want to mention something else. A while back, there was some controversy about the US taking Anwar Al-Awliki out with a drone strike. Especially because Awlaki claimed to not have dirty hands or take part in terrorist attacks (and attempts) coming from Al-Qaeda Yemen. But in an interview shortly before he was killed, Cherif Kouachi specifically stated that he was financed by Al-Awlaki.

  5. #80
    Elite Member ikmccall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wilmington, Delaware, United States
    Posts
    4,311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    I think that it is believed she sneaked out during the melee after the other person was shot. And that she was pretending to be a hostage. If so, that was a serious lapse on the commandos' part.

    Wasn't that part of the plot of the movie Quick Change? Not to be flippant.
    SHELLEE likes this.

  6. #81
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ikmccall View Post
    Wasn't that part of the plot of the movie Quick Change? Not to be flippant.
    I'm not sure, but it was also part of the story with "Inside Man" (Denzel Washington and Clive Owen).

  7. #82
    Elite Member CornFlakegrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hanging with the raisin girls
    Posts
    11,970

    Default

    Thanks for answering A*O. I don't see a lack of response to radical Islam (but again, I'm in America where a lot ordinary citizens would gladly get out their rifle and put a hole in anyone thought to be threat).

    People go out of their way to make the distinction between radicals and regular Muslims, but I don't see that as kowtowing, that's trying to be fair. The US and it's allies have been chasing, tracking, bombing, killing, and generally hunting known radicals for 14 years. Maybe it's helped, I don't know because we can't measure what terror was avoided, but I don't see how media being afraid to use the word Islam has undermined that effort or allowed terrorism to breed.

    Frankly, I think we don't know what to do and some take comfort in the idea that there is a simple solution, but we just choose not to use it. There isn't a fix and I don't know of any thing we can do to eradicate terrorism completely or make ourselves safe 100% of the time.


    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    I think that it is believed she sneaked out during the melee after the other person was shot. And that she was pretending to be a hostage. If so, that was a serious lapse on the commandos' part.

    ETA - I do want to mention something else. A while back, there was some controversy about the US taking Anwar Al-Awliki out with a drone strike. Especially because Awlaki claimed to not have dirty hands or take part in terrorist attacks (and attempts) coming from Al-Qaeda Yemen. But in an interview shortly before he was killed, Cherif Kouachi specifically stated that he was financed by Al-Awlaki.
    I think we can hunt down radicals and uphold our own laws and moral principles.
    Last edited by CornFlakegrl; January 10th, 2015 at 09:45 AM.

  8. #83
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CornFlakegrl View Post
    I think we can hunt down radicals and uphold our own laws and moral principles.
    In Al-Awlaki's case, we were accused of killing this guy against our principles. Despite the wealth of evidence that he was lying about his involvement in numerous attempted attacks coming out of Yemen. Kouachi's statement is just more evidence that Al-Awlaki got what he deserved.

  9. #84
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    32,426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CornFlakegrl View Post

    I think we can hunt down radicals and uphold our own laws and moral principles.
    Amen. And without murdering their children.
    cherrypye likes this.
    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  10. #85
    Elite Member CornFlakegrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hanging with the raisin girls
    Posts
    11,970

    Default

    Wasn't he the American citizen? I don't want my government going around executing it's citizens or skipping due process. No matter how bad the bad guy is.

    ETA: this was in response to Mo.
    witchcurlgirl likes this.

  11. #86
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CornFlakegrl View Post
    Wasn't he the American citizen? I don't want my government going around executing it's citizens or skipping due process. No matter how bad the bad guy is.

    ETA: this was in response to Mo.
    I don't want my American citizens going to live in another country and funding the mass murder of cartoonists and civilians in other countries.

  12. #87
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    50,858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A*O View Post
    The West must stand up for freedom—and acknowledge the link between Islamists’ political ideology and their religious beliefs.
    By
    Ayaan Hirsi Ali
    Jan. 7, 2015 6:08 p.m. ET
    After the horrific massacre Wednesday at the French weekly satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, perhaps the West will finally put away its legion of useless tropes trying to deny the relationship between violence and radical Islam.
    i've read ayaan hirsi ali. she's a bit of a provocateur but she makes some good points. she's also incredibly biased - understandable given her personal trajectory but it does mean that you have to take what she says with a bit of a grain of salt because she herself can be a little extreme.

    but unless i'm missing something here, i don't think anyone is "denying the relationship between violence and radical islam"? what people are making a point to distinguish is the relationship between violence and plain old regular islam. unless what you're trying to say is that all of islam is radical and violent, in which case no, i don't agree with you.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  13. #88
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,316

    Default

    The policeman shot in the street, begging for his lie, was a muslim father of two. He died helping defend Charlie Hebdo.
    sputnik and Brah like this.

  14. #89
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    50,858

    Default

    exactly. and one of the copy editors that worked at charlie and got killed in the massacre, was french-algerian and muslim too.

    check out #jesuisahmed, it's all muslims saying that charlie hebdo may have mocked their religion (and all religions) but he died defending their right to do so.

    #JeSuisAhmed Reveals the Hero of the Paris Shooting Everyone Needs to Know - Mic
    MohandasKGanja likes this.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  15. #90
    A*O
    A*O is offline
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! A*O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Being Paula
    Posts
    30,275

    Default

    Probably too soon but it struck me how, ahem, "unready" the French authorities were in dealing with all these incidents. Hundreds of cops, commandos, SWAT teams, helicopters, armoured vehicles, snipers, you name it, and the bad guys (and woman) still managed to evade capture for a while at least and then create further hostage situations and loss of life including their own.
    LaFolie likes this.
    I've never liked lesbianism - it leaves a bad taste in my mouth
    Dame Edna Everage

    Just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Seven dead in shooting near UC Santa Barbara
    By KrisNine in forum Crime and Punishment
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: May 30th, 2014, 05:12 AM
  2. Two Dead in Shooting at Virginia Tech (Again!)
    By Brookie in forum Crime and Punishment
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 8th, 2011, 11:25 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 7th, 2011, 12:13 PM
  4. Replies: 767
    Last Post: April 22nd, 2007, 09:37 PM
  5. 3 dead in Chicago skyscraper shooting
    By Laurent in forum News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 8th, 2006, 08:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •