Deadly gun attack in Paris: Global reactions &amp; discussion

Original post by missfats

Yet again, within the space of a few minutes...

Hatred to an ideology, is fair enough and justifiable within the realms of the supposed 'freedom of speech' which is riddled within the EU. However, stating "violent, aggressive, child-raping misogynist and mass-murdering war criminal" is baseless to this debate about whether followers should be allowed to react in such harsh manners,considering Muhammad (pbuh) did not kill those who ridiculed and tortured him but rather prayed for them " “O my Lord, guide my people along the true path, as they are ignorant of the truth".
So if these Muslim's are killing people who ridicule Muhammad (pbuh), it comes down to the question; "Would Muhammad (pbuh) react in the same way"? If so, then you are obviously here only to fuel your own personal agenda and cannot differentiate between the sun-nah and how these people react.

To OP, please stop misleading people with your title; it should say "Muslims" not "Islam" but i guess it's easy for you to not see the difference.

sometimes he prayed, sometimes he killed....look deeper into books.

Reply 162

the bear

20

Original post by ESPORTIVA

there is a video online of the attackers executing a cop online

its on liveleak

very graphic

guy begs for his life but is shot in the head

i watched the video. these people are scum. they will go straight to Hell in the next few hours.

Reply 163

Original post by ineedtorevise127

They lied about 9/11, They lied about Iraq, They lie everybody. How can anyone believe the government and one witness saying they did it for the Prophet Muhammad PBUH? How do you know he is not trying to set up Muslims?

Yeh. Muslims never do anything wrong

The same logic didn't apply to Brevik though.

Reply 164

L'Evil Fish

Not that I in any shape or form condone the behaviour...

But the only intention of satirical cartoons of the prophet and other religious personas are to piss off the followers, and give off the whole 'I can do what I want.'

They're unnecessary, it's like being in school and repeatedly drawing someone in your class in a really embarrassing wah, being told to stop, but carrying on. And then the person being drawn decides to beat them up. That'd be fine.

So yeah, should not have been done, but I think inflammatory content shouldn't be published because you don't know (or do know...) how certain groups will react.

Reply 165

interact

15

Disgusting attack, very sad to watch the clip of a police officer beg for his life. RIP

Reply 166

felamaslen

15

Every time I hear news from France it's more and more disturbing. First the Toulouse murders of defenseless Jewish schoolchildren in 2012, now a massacre of journalists in the heart of Paris. Plus rampant anti-Semitism in France is forcing many of its Jews to emigrate to Israel (http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.635359). Clearly the French government is not doing nearly enough to oppose Islamism within its own borders, which is presumably why 25% of the French people voted for an "anti-Islam" (but really "fascist") party in the EU elections. I'm pessimistic about the future of France unless it undergoes some kind of 21st century political mini-enlightenment. It needs to learn from the mistakes it made prior to and during 1940, or we could witness the second fall of France to this new kind of fascism.

Reply 167

Original post by L'Evil Fish

Not that I in any shape or form condone the behaviour...

But the only intention of satirical cartoons of the prophet and other religious personas are to piss off the followers, and give off the whole 'I can do what I want.'

They're unnecessary, it's like being in school and repeatedly drawing someone in your class in a really embarrassing wah, being told to stop, but carrying on. And then the person being drawn decides to beat them up. That'd be fine.

So yeah, should not have been done, but I think inflammatory content shouldn't be published because you don't know (or do know...) how certain groups will react.

No one drew it repeatedly.

It was one issue.

So it is a completely nonsensical comparison

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 168

L'Evil Fish

Original post by DorianGrayism

No one drew it repeatedly.

It was one issue.

So it is a completely nonsensical comparison

They published more than one piece to enrage.

So not one issue.

And it wasn't a result of that certain publication.

Reply 169

username917703

17

Original post by L'Evil Fish

Not that I in any shape or form condone the behaviour...

But the only intention of satirical cartoons of the prophet and other religious personas are to piss off the followers, and give off the whole 'I can do what I want.'

They're unnecessary, it's like being in school and repeatedly drawing someone in your class in a really embarrassing wah, being told to stop, but carrying on. And then the person being drawn decides to beat them up. That'd be fine.

So yeah, should not have been done, but I think inflammatory content shouldn't be published because you don't know (or do know...) how certain groups will react.

If somebody goes out and kills someone because they don't like a cartoon, then they are a ****ing nutter. It's just mental how people can blame the cartoon :biggrin:

There has been loads of satirical cartoons involving Jesus and nobody gives a ****. We can't ban satire ffs.

Maajid Nawaz has just been talking sense on Sky News, said a reform in attitude is needed from the Muslim communities as without it and the attitude to things like blasphemy it breeds these sorts of idiots.

Reply 170

Original post by L'Evil Fish

They published more than one piece to enrage.

So not one issue.

And it wasn't a result of that certain publication.

Yes, it was.

It was particularly because of the Mohammed publication.

Who cares what you think anyway? You said it would be fine to attack someone for making fun of someone in school. You cannot be taken seriously.

Reply 171

Original post by Dexa

The priority to should be safety of people, not freedom of speech. This incident could have been avoided.

Lol.

Yes. Forget about common sense.

Reply 172

sevchenko

15

Original post by L'Evil Fish

Not that I in any shape or form condone the behaviour...

But the only intention of satirical cartoons of the prophet and other religious personas are to piss off the followers, and give off the whole 'I can do what I want.'

They're unnecessary, it's like being in school and repeatedly drawing someone in your class in a really embarrassing wah, being told to stop, but carrying on. And then the person being drawn decides to beat them up. That'd be fine.

So yeah, should not have been done, but I think inflammatory content shouldn't be published because you don't know (or do know...) how certain groups will react.

What about their rights to freedom of speech and expression? Why should there be one rule for the rest of us and not a special group?

But then again where do you draw the line between freedom of expression and offensiveness? People can't express what they like if it discriminates against others

Reply 173

L'Evil Fish

Original post by Wilfred Little

If somebody goes out and kills someone because they don't like a cartoon, then they are a ****ing nutter. It's just mental how people can blame the cartoon :biggrin:

There has been loads of satirical cartoons involving Jesus and nobody gives a ****. We can't ban satire ffs.

Maajid Nawaz has just been talking sense on Sky News, said a reform in attitude is needed from the Muslim communities as without it and the attitude to things like blasphemy it breeds these sorts of idiots.

Not disagreeing with that.

They don't get any media attention that's why, everyone loves to just blow everything about of proportion with Muslims and then they get annoyed and do stupid **** like this. If no one publicised the stuff, Muslims would never have come across. People enjoy just sharing it and Mocking

Again, I don't disagree. But I don't see the point in publishing things just for the sake of pissing people off. Just breeds hate and stupid responses

Original post by DorianGrayism

Yes, it was.

It was particularly because of the Mohammed publication.

Who cares what you think anyway? You said it would be fine to attack someone for making fun of someone in school. You cannot be taken seriously.

You don't know that.

It wasn't just one Muhammad publication, there have been more than one.

If someone was taunting someone and belittling them, making them feel crap. Asked to stop. But continued, they deserve the punch they get.

Reply 174

joey11223

20

Original post by L'Evil Fish

If someone was taunting someone and belittling them, making them feel crap. Asked to stop. But continued, they deserve the punch they get.

hmm..a punch, 12 dead, some with nothing to do with the publication, a police offer executed.....quite a punch. Of course Arab media fairly often produce cartoons ridiculing Jews, the West...some might find them rather hurtful, especially those showing the pope posing with the devil, the holocaust being a lie..a joke, etc...so, I suppose we should probably respond in kind, albeit we have the capability to do rather more than send a few mad gunman in to a newspaper office, we could turn that office into smouldering rubble,.... quite a punch it would be.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 175

matthewduncan

12

Original post by sevchenko

What about their rights to freedom of speech and expression? Why should there be one rule for the rest of us and not a special group?

But then again where do you draw the line between freedom of expression and offensiveness? People can't express what they like if it discriminates against others

Freedom of speech is a myth.
Anyone with an ounce of common sense should know that

Reply 176