Deadly gun attack in Paris: Global reactions & discussion

By refering to mulsims you refere to everyone that has ties to the religion. Maybe you should be more specific and say what should the backlash against the gun men should be.

The other poster didn't bother to differentiate so why should I?

Reply 381

Thuggee

1

Original post by Jemner01

I never made the claim that the massacre of journalists/cartoons is the direct result of the US repeatedly invading or funding invasions of the Middle-East for geopolitical reasons. I did make the claim that the religion of Islam isn't the only reason- .

it is the only reason becuase whenever there is some dispute with a non muslim population, islamists call it some 'jihad' and then act like animals such as this case. whether it be political, economic, boundary dispute or jsut about a cartoon, the islamists mind is a simplistic one. surely you understand that the idea of copying and idolizing the life of a man who lived in a desert tribe in the year 700, to be a simplistic one in the first place.?

this is not to say the USA havent been *******s in its foreign policy, but this isnt jsut the case of the last 15 years ( which is what current sunni islamists bitch about ) but also the prior 20 years too ( when usa policy supported them. at least a fight against islamists undertaken by USA is a fight worthwhile for the sake of intelligent human civilisation

Reply 382

Trupac

5

Original post by matthewduncan

after just watching the video of the execution this doesnt seem like such a crazy idea
who gets shot in the head and theres no blood??

Yh exactly! I was expecting to see brains on the pavement the way he is shot at point blank.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bc6_1420632668

Reply 383

6Jesus6Christ6

Original post by Trupac

Yh exactly! I was expecting to see brains on the pavement the way he is shot at point blank.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bc6_1420632668

Special forces too, that hip-fire.

Reply 384

DiddyDec01

3

Original post by Trupac

Yh exactly! I was expecting to see brains on the pavement the way he is shot at point blank.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bc6_1420632668

And what are the basing that idea from? Movies?

Shooting someone at point black does not mean their head is going to explode.

Reply 385

Jemner01

8

Original post by DorianGrayism

Well, that might be the reason why some extremists are created. That is still religious though.

If it was not for the Jihadist / Brotherhood element of Islam then why would a Muslim from the other-side of the world care?

We can agree that it is a minority of Muslims. However, the reason why these violent reaction exist and will continue to exist is because people hold the Qu'ran to be the literal word of God and Mohammed to be the next best thing to God.

As long as those beliefs are held, then people will get killed for Cartoons and etc.

They are motivated by religion, yeah, I never said they weren't motivated by religion (hence why they were killing in the name of Allah as opposed to some other reason) just that they may not have perpetrated attacks on the West if they did not beleive the West was to blame for the invasion and subsequent screwing up of their country, a country which to them was better pre-invasion. And they might not hold this belief is the West had not intervened at all. But that's all debateable.

The same can be said of any religion, not just Islam. What sets Islam apart is the outlining of the Jihad, the end goal of acheiving a Caliphate and enforcing Sharia law which is followed by some Muslims. Not all religious people follow their holy texts down to the last word. And out of the ones that do, very few have either the means, the ability or both to kill for it.

I'm on and off about that last part. I can agree that a religion that teaches to kill infidels and erect a religious political system is not savoury at best and a danger to civilisation as we no it at worst. But at the same time, I beleive in freedom of thought and freedom of speech. If someone wants to follow religion x because y then I think they should be able to. Action should be taken if they infringe on someone else's freedoms, not before. They can scream about stoning unclothed women all they like, as long as they don't actually do it, which is true for the majority of Muslims.

Reply 386

pink pineapple

14

Original post by Dexa

Is it really standing up at the expense of innocent lives?

Well ultimately it would the head of the magazine that would agree to publish the material, so it was his call in the end. The workers are simply doing their job. I thought it was stupid that they publish such a thing at a time of already raised racial and religious unrest in the city.

Magazines such as Charlie Hebdo should be able to publish images without death threats or the possibility of heinous attacks like this. Freedom of expression is an essential part of a democracy, especially in place like France which is strictly secular.

Reply 387

young_guns

1

Original post by ineedtorevise127

Just like in 9/11 when some Israelis with explosives were allowed back to Israel without being checked

That's completely made up. You should be ****ing ashamed of yourself

Reply 388

Groot

6

Original post by pink pineapple

Magazines such as Charlie Hebdo should be able to publish images without death threats or the possibility of heinous attacks like this. Freedom of expression is an essential part of a democracy, especially in place like France which is strictly secular.

The line is just drawn on the wrong place.

Reply 389

Thuggee

1

Original post by 6Jesus6Christ6

Special forces too, that hip-fire.

antything but special forces, a bunch of donkeys given automatic weapons, even with these guns they took 3 attempts to kill a patrol officer. this is the same gay whos shoe came off getting into the car? these are retards with guns paid for by the saudis etc, which is basicially islamic terorrism unfortuantly not being tackled enough in the world yet

the video is not clear, there is every chance he missed even at pointblanc range and shot the pavement( or jsut shot him in the shoulder) why was he doing a running shot?

Reply 390

young_guns

1

Original post by Jemner01

They are motivated by religion, yeah, I never said they weren't motivated by religion (hence why they were killing in the name of Allah as opposed to some other reason) just that they may not have perpetrated attacks on the West if they did not beleive the West was to blame for the invasion and subsequent screwing up of their country, a country which to them was better pre-invasion

So you are saying these terrorists are Iraqi/Afghani? What will you say when it turns out they're not?

To be honest, it just sounds like you want to make mealy-mouthed justifications that blame this barbarous act of religious islamofascism on Western foreign policy

You sicken me

Reply 391

Trupac

5

Original post by DiddyDec

And what are the basing that idea from? Movies?

Shooting someone at point black does not mean their head is going to explode.

Not gonna lie so yeah I am basing it on movies. But still someone getting shot with an Ak47 at point blank, there should be little bit of blood no?

Reply 392

Juichiro

18

Original post by generic_man

Charlie Hebdo is well-known for not backing down in the face of threats from Islamofascists and I hope they continue with that stance after this attack. How depressing that this could happen in Europe in 2015...

You changed your sig so quickly.

Reply 393

username456717

19

Original post by BleiYoung

For somebody that appears to have the basic knowledge/ education to understand how to use the internet, I'm suprised that you just typed a statement that lacked so much sense. Asking 'decent' muslims to apologise on behalf of a few members of their group is very foolish. The 'decent Muslims' did nothing wrong than following their religion peacefully. Next time a European commits a crime, I am expecting an apology from every single European thanks :smile:

Tell a white person about slavery and the repercussions of their ancestors actions they're quick to do 'That wasn't me you can't blame me'.

You seem to misunderstand me; i didn't say they had to apologise that would be stupid.

The only way we can get radical Islam to stop is by actual Muslims confronting extremist preachers and letting the authorities know of radical teachings that could lead to this.

For somebody that appears to have the basic knowledge/ education to understand how to use the internet, I'm suprised that you just typed a statement that lacked so much sense.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 394

Dexa

1

Original post by pink pineapple

Magazines such as Charlie Hebdo should be able to publish images without death threats or the possibility of heinous attacks like this. Freedom of expression is an essential part of a democracy, especially in place like France which is strictly secular.

This is undermining the righteous nature of freedom of expression. What exactly were they hoping to campaign for when they published those images? There was no good intention coming from the pictures. There are other ways of standing up to extremists but this was a very stupid thing to do when the religious tension was already high in the city.

Reply 395

username456717

19

Original post by Trupac

The point which must be noted is that hebdo magazine didn't exclusively target muslims, they made fun of christianity, popes etc. About an hour ago 40 people died in Yemen(http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/officials-suicide-bomber-kills-15-yemen-28046604) in an apparent suicide attack and it was just last month 100+ children were slaughtered in Pakistan. Everyday 100's
of muslims are killed by these lunatics who are just using religion as an excuse to kill.

The minority that are radical must be stopped; however the vast majority of Muslims are no different to you or me and they should not have to put up with the inevitable retaliation from angry people.

Reply 396

viddy9

16

Terrible. Completely unjustified, unnecessary killings which increase the net suffering in the world.

Satirists and cartoonists have a right to publish whatever they want, although I don't see why people would publish cartoons of Muhammad in the first place. Surely the decent thing to do is to just refrain from doing such a thing if you know it's going to cause people psychological suffering.

Reply 397

Lady Comstock

14

Original post by Jemner01

They are motivated by religion, yeah, I never said they weren't motivated by religion (hence why they were killing in the name of Allah as opposed to some other reason) just that they may not have perpetrated attacks on the West if they did not beleive the West was to blame for the invasion and subsequent screwing up of their country, a country which to them was better pre-invasion. And they might not hold this belief is the West had not intervened at all. But that's all debateable.

BS. The Salman Rushdie affair was way before the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

France now has minimal involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, other countries targeted by extremists for similar things (such as Sweden and Denmark) have had little to no involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is apologist claptrap.

Reply 398

Jemner01

8

Original post by young_guns

So you are saying these terrorists are Iraqi/Afghani? What will you say when it turns out they're not?

To be honest, it just sounds like you want to make mealy-mouthed justifications that blame this barbarous act of religious islamofascism on Western foreign policy

You sicken me

From the Middle-East. I'd be surprised if they were not.

Can you read? I've stated not once but twice that I'm in no way, shape or form justifying what terroists do or have done including today's attack. I blame the two individuals for the act, and they are to be held responsible (not Islam- but the individuals who actually shot up the place). If you want to beleive that the all of the UN's inverventions have been 100% jusified in every way then by all means, beleive it. I'm not holding it against you, I just don't have the same opinion as you.

Reply 399

Smash Bandicoot

5

It was almost certainly ISIS, I can't believe this is getting censored on the site, it is possible to respect a people/culture/religion without respecting or tolerating the extremists

e.g. I was born a confirmed Christian, but I hate the Westboro Baptist Church

eg. I respect a lot of Indian culture, but I abhor 'honour' killings among other things

so then mods e.g. I respect Islam, finish my sentence

Deadly gun attack in Paris: Global reactions & discussion

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you