The Student Room Group

Deadly gun attack in Paris: Global reactions & discussion

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Antzlck
So you spout a lot of nonsense when all you needed to say is 'yes, you're right, we don't care'.

Who's the 'our' you speak off?


The first "our" is for the UK.

The second "our" is for the people whose ancestors fought in World War 2. Which I would say is the majority of Britain.

Right now the wars abroad are not our biggest concern. African nations have been in turmoil my entire life. Africa has a long history of turmoil. It is not that we don't care, it is that we don't care as much.
Original post by Jesuisunpoulet
I live in France and all of you English racists make me laught. Don't spread your racial ideology into our country, unlike in the UK in France you are not judged by your race/religion but by your character. I am a French Sri Lankan , and we all know that those people were religious extremists like Ander Breivik , who was brainwashed by EDL.I am proud to say that I love France/my french brothers(including muslims. You English people won't break us!


I've not seen any racism in this thread, care to name an example?
Original post by Skip_Snip
I've not seen any racism in this thread, care to name an example?


There is if you like, bigotry and hate speech in this thread. Perhaps not racism, but indirect racism one may say. What is your stance on this incident if i may ask?
Original post by DiddyDec
This was an attack on our doorstep. An attack on our freedom of expression and an attack on our freedom of press. It was an attack on the very cornerstones of our society. Of course we are going to talk about it at length.

These freedoms which have been attacked are what 60+ million died for during World War 2. Our ancestors died so that we could have the ability to continue to express ourselves.

If you don't think that this is important then you should just **** off.


I am intrigued to know what your opinion is on this issue?
Original post by Good bloke
I'm afraid he talks nonsense when he says:





The cartoons did not target Islamic communities at all. They targeted hypocrisy in religion, the use of religion for political and terrorist purposes, and those who suborned religious motifs in their ideology.


What utter drivel. Please elaborate on your naive perspective...
Original post by JamesNeedHelp2
There is if you like, bigotry and hate speech in this thread. Perhaps not racism, but indirect racism one may say. What is your stance on this incident if i may ask?


What stance is there to take, apart from it's a bloody sad thing to have happened?
Original post by Fullofsurprises
I agree with some of that, but I don't think we can be quite so confident that the anti-'fascist' side is 'winning', given that the Jihadis now have their own country, which they didn't before and are on the edge of having several more. (Yemen and presumably Afghanistan as soon as the US packs up and leaves it to the Taliban.)

I also don't think that 'Islamofascist' is really all that accurate. What really motivated these people? Hamza is in the mix (perhaps predictably) as are ISIS, but surely we should look at Algeria if we want to really get to the bottom of this. Like Egypt, Algeria originally had a reasonably moderate and idealistic Islamic-tinged democratic movement that was suppressed with the most appalling brutality. The cruelty directed at those who opposed the tyranny of the French-supported government of Algeria over many years is amongst the worst of any country in the world. Against that background, is it totally surprising that young men from poor backgrounds with few prospects in a country that practises public contempt and hate for their religion almost as a state-sanctioned activity and who must be fully aware of the history of their country are extremely angry?

They are prey to every passing fanatic with a plausible message aimed at giving them some feeling of worthiness and meeting their desire for revenge.

I am not condoning their actions, but there is so much ignorance on this in France and here. The French would prefer to forget their imperialistic oppression of Algeria and also choose to permit vitriolic attacks on Muslim beliefs as a way of life. Is that right?


I agreed with everything you stated until the part in bold above. I actually believe that their views were much more deep rooted and thought through than having views that "every fanatic with a plausible message" can develop as you have stated. They are not lost souls that wandered through a farrago of distortions and were unlucky enough to be indoctrinated as per chance. However, if you do disagree with this, please state your reasons.
Original post by Skip_Snip
What stance is there to take, apart from it's a bloody sad thing to have happened?


Let me phrase it to you in a different way. What is to blame for this occurrence and to what extent does it impact the clash between the western civilisation and the Muslim world?
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Josb
This has nothing to do with Charlie-Hebdo, an Anarcho-Marxist magazine, whose members have fought racism and colonialism all their life. Cabu was notably mobilised in the French army during the Algerian war and drew antimilitarist cartoons during this time (and therefore risked his life).
As true Marxists, they have always despised religions, hence their recurring attacks against Islam, which in my opinion, were mild compared to their statements against Catholics and right-wing politicians.
Comparing them with KKK is ludicrous and meaningless.


I would beg to differ.
Original post by JamesNeedHelp2
Let me phrase it to you in a different way. What is to blame for this occurrence and to what extent does it impact the clash between the western civilisation and the Muslim world?


What's to blame is muslims' indoctrination, and inability to see a drawing for what it is - a drawing.
Reply 1190
Original post by JamesNeedHelp2
I would beg to differ.

Please.
Original post by Skip_Snip
What's to blame is muslims' indoctrination, and inability to see a drawing for what it is - a drawing.


Well it is easy for a non-Muslim to see it as just a drawing. To Muslims however, the prophet has a much more significant importance. You are right, they have every right to offend 1.7 billion muslims, but is it really necessary? It is almost like the analogy were we are situated in a school playground and the bullies are allowed to bully the victim, and most of the victims are willing to take the bullying, except a few that retaliate.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Josb
Please.


I like your manners. Well done to your parents.
Original post by 6Jesus6Christ6
It's a cartoon.

Is that what you do in your spare time, draw pictures of mohammed? Or perhaps the only reason you draw them is because you wish to offend other people.

Personally if someone finds something offensive, I'm not going to go out of my way to offend them. It's what used to be called, "being a decent human".


Grow up, and wake up.


Why do you go out of your way to quote a post not directed to you and offend me with all your insults? :confused:
Original post by ParasiteRex
He's not necessarily wrong. The prime target for most jihadis is the US, yet the US has practically no problem with Islamic domestic terrorism despite a population of about 2 million Muslims. This is because to immigrate to the US you need an education and capital both of which could probably be shown to inversely correlate to tendency to performing criminal acts.

Meanwhile, immigration to France from North Africa is easymode because of former ties and banlieues are often the easiest place for Africans to integrate because they require absolutely no integration as there's nothing French about them. They leave school without an education or qualifications, build a criminal record, make rap videos and by the time they realise it's no fun to be an adult delinquent they've rejected all their opportunities. They'll go to prison for something (black guy had convictions for armed robbery and drug dealing), convert to Islam because there are no prerequisites and become self-righteously antisocial. Islam has become a magnet for losers.


yes it has become a magnet but that doesnt make his comments any more than bull. and france has a bigger problem than even the uk with vast majority of its much larger muslim populatons uneducated and out of work, their prsion population is something like 70% islamic. thes peopl get drawn to islamist ideologies then are driven by islamist propagndas, so these and all other attacks are entirely linked. it was nothing to do with nationalities or racial charcteristics, thats a complete red- herring often raised to try and distract from the obvious common factor in all similar cases, which is the influence of islamist ideologies. sticking your head in the sand or blatently lieing about it is never going to address the problem.
Often people make the mistake of thinking the right to draw Mohammed is a simple battle between those who wish for the right to offend and the right not to be offended. This could not be more wrong. The Islamists who try to use violence to attack those who offend them have an ulterior motive. Sure, those pulling the trigger may believe they do so simply to avenge the prophet but this is the superficial motivation of the movement as a whole. The real aim of these Islamist groups is domination through fear and terror. The first step in maintaining a totalitarian regime is to silence those who would speak against you and destroy freedom of speech. But the Islamists would have a hard time doing this in one fell stroke. Instead they must attack an aspect of freedom of expression that they can gain support in. By attacking freedom of speech under the disguise of protecting the honour of Mohammed they can gain the sympathy and support of millions of Muslims and non Muslims worldwide. This may not be direct support of the violence but it does not need to be. Every comment that places blame on the victims, every voice that says ‘you should watch what you say’ and every time outrage at being offended trumps outrage of violence the attack on freedom of speech is validated and perpetuated. By picking an issue on which they can gain widespread sympathy the extremists can drive in the thin edge of the wedge to slowly destroy freedom of speech and remove the biggest block to establishing their totalitarian regime.

That is why the battle to draw Mohammed is not one of offense but one of freedom versus totalitarianism. It is the duty of everyone who values a free society to put aside their own feelings and support those who seek the right to offend. #jesuisCharlie
Original post by JamesNeedHelp2
Please elaborate on your naive perspective...


It is very simple. I have seen many of the cartoons involving Mohammed and it is obvious that they satirise the ridiculous things people are forced to do in the name of religion, the ways that people use religion to have a political effect, and the ways that religious instruction is corrupted by unscrupulous fundamentalists and others. I suggest you see them for yourself and make your own mind up. If you haven't seen them you aren't really in a position to comment on their intended target.
Original post by JamesNeedHelp2
Well it is easy for a non-Muslim to see it as just a drawing. To Muslims however, the prophet has a much more significant importance. You are right, they have every right to offend 1.7 billion muslims, but is it really necessary? It is almost like the analogy were we are situated in a school playground and the bullies are allowed to bully the victim, and most of the victims are willing to take the bullying, except a few that retaliate.

For the record, the magazine charlie hebdo was not a popular journal nor should it be, it has made some frankly tasteless comment about other faiths , catholisism and judaism particulalrly on the borderline of racism perhaps i other countries ( note howver islamists were bothered about these insults- showing its not the lack of taste or offensivenes in general they had an issue with)
the bigger issue here is the right of free speech, without which we would all be the mindless unthinking drones that islamists actually want in the world. so its about intellectuallism being attacked by primitive ideologies - ones that view anything 'western' as unislamic. but modern france was built n the ideas of democracy, free speech and intellectualism ( all non islamic ideas), so you have to ask why 10s of millions of practicing muslims have flocked to live there?
islamists are trying to bully their ideology on human civilisation, but this is not the 8th century, socieites dont sucumb to mindless threats of violence, particualrly not in the west. what have the islamists achieved after allthis? multiplying Charlie hebdos exposure 100 fold and making it even harder for regualr muslism to live outside of islamic countires
Original post by JamesNeedHelp2
To Muslims however, the prophet has a much more significant importance.

Therein lies the problem. They're brainwashed to the extent that a drawing of a long dead paedo drives them to terrorism.

It is almost like the analogy were we are situated in a school playground and the bullies are allowed to bully the victim, and most of the victims are willing to take the bullying, except a few that retaliate.

So muslims get to both act violently for no valid reason and play the victim card?
Original post by Skip_Snip
Therein lies the problem. They're brainwashed to the extent that a drawing of a long dead paedo drives them to terrorism.


So muslims get to both act violently for no valid reason and play the victim card?


All i see in bold above, that is your statements, is your opinion. Opinions dont equate fact. In a intellectual environment, facts are of greatest significance. This is to make sure a credible study and above all, rational conclusion is achieved.
(edited 9 years ago)

Quick Reply