Shooting reported at Paris magazine Charlie Hebdo

[dx713]

I see that as hope.
When even a usual target as the Brotherhood condemns the attack on Charlie Hebdo, it might mean that they are slowly recognizing that being sometime offended isn't that high a price to pay to live in a free country, and that a Sharia dictatorship might not be all what it's cracked up to be?

Of course, it might just be a base political move to appeal the moderate part of their base, but let me hope a little, please.

 

[Metaphor]

It is particularly important to be clear about where we stand, for the attackers said things that cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. They said they were avenging the prophet. That was wrong. In fact, it is the message of Islam, our principles and values, that have been betrayed and tainted.

Guardian

Things must be bad when even the Guardianistas blanch at this nonsense.

I almost stopped when Ramadan described himself as a Muslim scholar, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt. But then I got to this part:

But I also told him that he had to be clear about the way he was using that right. In 2008 his magazine fired a cartoonist who made a joke about a Jewish link to President Sarkozy’s son. Where was the freedom of expression there, I asked the satirical magazine.

Some funds need to be directed to study the mental disorder where people think "freedom of expression" means "I have a right to air my views, and you as a private individual or company must be compelled to publish them and finance them, or else you hate freedom".

For fuck's sake. It gets worse, though

but to target an already stigmatised people in France is not really showing much courage.

It takes more fucking balls than I have to draw cartoons that increase your likelihood of being targeted by violent extremists who will kill you for it. And who did, subsequently, kill you.

 

[untermensche]

They murdered a bunch of cartoonists who published offensive pictures of Mohammed, the prophet of Islam. There are plenty of Muslims who want to kill cartoonists for exactly that, so there is no doubt that it is an Islamic belief.

The crime was condemned by Muslims all over the world so there is no doubt it is not an Islamic belief.

The religious beliefs of extremists and fundamentalists do not cease to be religious beliefs because there are more people under the same religious banner who believe otherwise.

If Muslims overwhelmingly condemn it, as they have, then it is not an accepted religious belief. It is a fringe belief held by people looking for any excuse to perpetrate violence.

It would surprise me if you were just looking for a way to blame this all on the USA and its allies for invading the Middle East.

That shouldn't surprise you.

When you invade and kill non-stop for over a decade you create a climate of violence and exacerbate any existing violent tendencies.

The US sets the example that massive violence, even to the point where many innocent are killed, is the way to settle differences.

 

[TSwizzle]

Don’t blame this bloodshed on France’s Muslims

[
For fuck's sake. It gets worse, though

Much worse.

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...e-bloody-intolerant-history-bloodshed-muslims

 

[bigfield]

The crime was condemned by Muslims all over the world so there is no doubt it is not an Islamic belief.

That is not reason to discount it as a Islamic belief. The error in your reasoning is obvious once you compare this to Christian beliefs.

The religious beliefs of extremists and fundamentalists do not cease to be religious beliefs because there are more people under the same religious banner who believe otherwise.

If Muslims overwhelmingly condemn it, as they have, then it is not an accepted religious belief. It is a fringe belief held by people looking for any excuse to perpetrate violence.

Being a fringe belief does not discount it as an Islamic belief. Just like with your definition of terrorism, you are making up criteria to suit your ends.

It would surprise me if you were just looking for a way to blame this all on the USA and its allies for invading the Middle East.

That shouldn't surprise you.

When you invade and kill non-stop for over a decade you create a climate of violence and exacerbate any existing violent tendencies.

The US sets the example that massive violence, even to the point where many innocent are killed, is the way to settle differences.

Humans have been using violence to settle differences since prehistory. Muslims have been murdering those who offend their religious beliefs for centuries, long before the USA started murdering civilians in the Middle East. There is no reason to think that they would not have continued to lose their minds over slights against Mohammed had the USA never set foot in the Middle East.

 

[untermensche]

That is not reason to discount it as a Islamic belief. The error in your reasoning is obvious once you compare this to Christian beliefs.

When Christians shoot abortion doctors for their god I do not claim this is a religious belief. It is an aberration, condemned by religious believers.

Being a fringe belief does not discount it as an Islamic belief. Just like with your definition of terrorism, you are making up criteria to suit your ends.

My ends?

My ends is to not be a hypocrite like those who claim the US is not engaging in terrorism because it uses expensive weapons to kill and terrorize civilians.

Humans have been using violence to settle differences since prehistory. Muslims have been murdering those who offend their religious beliefs for centuries, long before the USA started murdering civilians in the Middle East. There is no reason to think that they would not have continued to lose their minds over slights against Mohammed had the USA never set foot in the Middle East.

There hadn't been a suicide bombing in Iraq for centuries until the US invaded and terrorized the place.

To think the US can launch massive invasions based on lies and this isn't the catalyst for a lot of violence in response is simply a kind of blindness.

 

[Archimedes]

When Christians shoot abortion doctors for their god I do not claim this is a religious belief. It is an aberration, condemned by religious believers.

A religious aberration is still religious and something condemned by some religious believers is not inherently non-religious. These objections make no sense at all.

 

[untermensche]

When Christians shoot abortion doctors for their god I do not claim this is a religious belief. It is an aberration, condemned by religious believers.

A religious aberration is still religious and something condemned by some religious believers is not inherently non-religious. These objections make no sense at all.

Every delusion that pops into the head of somebody who believes in some god is not a religious belief.

Religion is something passed from one generation to another.

Momentary delusions that go nowhere are not part of the religion.

 

[Sarpedon]

There is no substance to that distinction: all religious beliefs are delusions. Whether they are 'momentary' or not from the point of view of the religion is irrelevant to how firmly they are believed by an individual.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

When Christians shoot abortion doctors for their god I do not claim this is a religious belief. It is an aberration, condemned by religious believers.

But they are doing it because of their religious beliefs--and they are basically just an extreme version of the normally accepted Christian doctrine.

 

[Barbarian]

The crime was condemned by Muslims all over the world so there is no doubt it is not an Islamic belief.

You seem to operate under the false assumption that if P is an Islamic belief then not-P cannot be an Islamic belief. Islam, like all Abrahamic beliefs, suffers from a severe case of ex falso quodlibet (on account of its axioms being inconsistent once they include omnipotence). All people believing that Allah is real and the Quran is his word are Muslims, and whatever they deduce from those beliefs by valid reasoning will be an Islamic belief, whether it contradicts other Islamic beliefs or not. Or are you under the illusion that the terrorists did not infer the justification for their acts from Islam?

It would be more important to know why do you feel so strongly that Islam needs to be acquitted this way?

 

[RavenSky]

I find it difficult to believe that the brothers' underlying motivation was their religion given that the police officer they murdered was also a Muslim.

 

[Jayjay]

I find it difficult to believe that the brothers' underlying motivation was their religion given that the police officer they murdered was also a Muslim.

Do you think they asked the beliefs of the police officers before shooting them? Or do muslims, like gays, all have built in radar sense to detect their own kind?

 

[dx713]

Intra religion wars aren't unheard of and actually often brutal.

The previous fundie Muslim shooter we've had started by killing a Muslim soldier for "turning against his brothers".

Plus, they had no way to know that policeman was Muslim.

But if you meant to say that it shows that Muslim doesn't imply jihadism or anti democratic behaviour, I follow you.

 

[RavenSky]

I find it difficult to believe that the brothers' underlying motivation was their religion given that the police officer they murdered was also a Muslim.

Do you think they asked the beliefs of the police officers before shooting them? Or do muslims, like gays, all have built in radar sense to detect their own kind?

The police officer was Algerian (which is 99% Muslim). Moreover, the police officer was on the ground wounded but talking when one of the brothers walked over and shot him point blank. I don't think it is outside the realm of possibility for the police officer to have been praying, do you? Said prayer would have been a tip-off to the shooter.

- - - Updated - - -

Intra religion wars aren't unheard of and actually often brutal.

The previous fundie Muslim shooter we've had started by killing a Muslim soldier for "turning against his brothers".

Plus, they had no way to know that policeman was Muslim.

But if you meant to say that it shows that Muslim doesn't imply jihadism or anti democratic behaviour, I follow you.

I don't agree that they had "no way" as I noted in my previous post, but the rest of your points are valid, in my opinion.

 

[crispy]

Do you think they asked the beliefs of the police officers before shooting them? Or do muslims, like gays, all have built in radar sense to detect their own kind?

The police officer was Algerian (which is 99% Muslim). Moreover, the police officer was on the ground wounded but talking when one of the brothers walked over and shot him point blank. I don't think it is outside the realm of possibility for the police officer to have been praying, do you? Said prayer would have been a tip-off to the shooter.

- - - Updated - - -

Intra religion wars aren't unheard of and actually often brutal.

The previous fundie Muslim shooter we've had started by killing a Muslim soldier for "turning against his brothers".

Plus, they had no way to know that policeman was Muslim.

But if you meant to say that it shows that Muslim doesn't imply jihadism or anti democratic behaviour, I follow you.

I don't agree that they had "no way" as I noted in my previous post, but the rest of your points are valid, in my opinion.

I read somewhere he actually said he was muslim too, but they didn't seem to care, not that it really says anything about their religious motivation. But you'd be a fool to believe it wasnt motivated by islam.

 

[laughing dog]

I think the religion is simply the surface issue here. There are plenty of Muslims or Islamists who do not go around murdering people. I find it hard to believe that Islam alone motivated these assassins.

 

[RavenSky]

I think the religion is simply the surface issue here. There are plenty of Muslims or Islamists who do not go around murdering people. I find it hard to believe that Islam alone motivated these assassins.

. ^^^ that.

 

[Bomb#20]

I find it difficult to believe that the brothers' underlying motivation was their religion given that the police officer they murdered was also a Muslim.

Just as Obama can't have been motivated by patriotism given that Anwar al-Awlaki was also an American.

 

[Barbarian]

I think the religion is simply the surface issue here. There are plenty of Muslims or Islamists who do not go around murdering people. I find it hard to believe that Islam alone motivated these assassins.

Perhaps their version of Islam did?