"Muslim" terrorists attack French magazine in Paris

I like it when folk use neutral and objective language and call us [ white non mulsim I assume] killing folk “isolated horrors” to minimise them and then scream about the threat of Islam when it happens abroad.

Very subtle and spin doctors everywhere are pleased with your language manipulation skills

APPLAUDS the misleading soundbite

Cougar – Moderator

It’s an interesting point though. If you did take religion out of the equation, we’d still have lunatics. In the absence of “Islam” they may well just have found a different cause to justify their behaviour. Guess we’ll never really know.

All religions go through cycles of liberal/fundamental thought and the consequences thereof.
Human nature, innit?

Islam has been tearing itself to pieces over the last century or so, leaving it particularly vulnerable to subversion.

So yes, Islam is hugely important – it’s the conduit allowing people to control and manipulate.

The trick is to realise that it could just as well be, and often has been, other religions that have been used in exactly the same way.

Mistaking the means of control for the actions of terrorists seems a little naive.

The trick is to realise that it could just as well be, and often has been, other religions that have been used in exactly the same way.

Accurate but not very useful. Hand wringing all very well but doesn’t contribute to a solution.

I was responding to Cougars question – I don’t have the answers.

But I don’t believe that demonising people because they believe in one of the myriad religions, belief systems or economic theories that are open to abuse contributes to a solution.

try and google Mulsims condem French attack…literally no hits not one

Maybe not, but when I spelled it correctly I got 6450 hits.

😆

When are the moderate white western democrats going to come out and denounce the attacks on mosques and Muslims we’ve seen in France in response to the Charlie Hebdo attacks?

Your silence implies tacit support.

As a white British male atheist I’d like to publicly condemn the attacks on mosques &c as per the previous post.

As a white British male atheist I’d also like to apologise for Rupert Murdoch. I’d also like to publicly apologise for Piers Morgan; he has no connection to the attacks that I’m aware of, he’s just a prick.

I dont think either number is accurate. >2 but <1.6bn however my point is that you (and others) claim they know best. I am surprised that you are trying to align Hungerford and similar isolated horrors with the threat of Islam.

Let’s just zoom in on part of that paragraph.

the threat of Islam.

What threat is this? The threat posed by a religion in itself or the threat of it being used by unscrupulous types to justify all sorts of outrages?

There are plenty of examples of Christian fundamentalists perpetrating all sorts of heinous crimes such as the Lebanese Phalange massacres of 1982, or the activities of a similar group during the Spanish civil war.

You really have to separate belief from action here.

You only ever step over the line because of your actions or perhaps the incitement of others to do the ‘doing’.

There is no ‘threat’ inherent to any belief until it leads to actions.

I think the main problem is that education and a relatively liberal society allows the likes of most on here to think rationally about such things. I’m not sure that is true in many places in the world.

Maybe not, but when I spelled it correctly I got 6450 hits

Chapeau and very funny 😆

Hand wringing all very well but doesn’t contribute to a solution.

Where as inaccurate fear spreading simplistic hyperbole straw men is ?

try and google Mulsims condem French attack…literally no hits not one

But plenty in French; the Imans are on TV, on the radio and in the French press

We played a spot-the-Muslim-dress-in-the crowd game yesterday. There weren’t any. The Muslims present were few in number and dressed the same as everyone else. After the call by Muslim leaders to participate in today’s march there are a few are in the crowds. A risky choice though; faced with being condemned by some of their own community for participating and their presence not being appreciated by some of the crowd it’s an easier decision to stay at home. I admire those that are out there and prepared to deliver a not-in-my-name message to journalists.

I can’t recall anyone posting a link to this short discussion on local radio but the presenter, James O’Brien, dismantles the apology argument very easily.

I’ve deliberately stayed out of this thread but have started to wonder whether Richard from Maidenhead frequents these parts…

I can’t recall anyone posting a link to this short discussion on local radio but the presenter, James O’Brien, dismantles the apology argument very easily.

That’s absolutely fantastic, thanks for sharing.

So why do so many think that these people are representative of Muslims

Cos they just ‘claim’ to be? Or is it cos they shout ‘Allahu Akbar’ when they kill people? Or I dunno it might be cos some have been known to state that they’re willing to die a martyr in the name of Islam.
Other than that, I’ve no idea. & before you start, I know they don’t represent Islam really, they just say they do.

Interesting piece here,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30766218

Why doesn’t this make the headlines?

U.S. Gov shuts off Water to Detroit (and Flint I believe)

U.S. Government shutdown for over a month due to finances late 2013

Keeps spending billions arming Israel

Hmm

How close to the truth is this?

Nowhere near it is just a right wing wet dream lampooning of “hand wringers” and the “liberal elite /PC do gooders .

Our results indicate that neither economic and political judgments, nor low levels of formal education appear to influence support for terrorism, raising doubt about the link between socio-economic conditions and the perceived legitimacy of terrorists acts.[23] Two particular results are worth stressing here: (i) the fact that particular values (attitudes on women’s rights – i.e. wearing the veil and working outside the home) and (ii) religious divisions (i.e. identifying as a Shi’a Muslim) did influence support for terrorism.

The implications of these results can be interpreted in a number of ways. One would be to conclude – as many political leaders and media commentators do – that the results show there is something inherently conservative and fundamentalist about Islam that generates support for violent jihad and antipathy towards Western secular values. It follows then that one solution lies in policy responses that promote a “moderate” form of Islam that encourages tolerance and a more liberal interpretation of the Quran. This is problematic, because it should not be up to governments to dictate what form of Islam Muslim people should follow – they should be free to decide for themselves. This does not mean that normative values derived from belief systems among Muslims should not be contended with or challenged when aiming to combat terrorism – the question is how can this be done in a way that does not isolate Muslim communities. This is important to consider because there is an intense debate among Muslims and Islamic scholars as to how elements of the Quran should be interpreted, for instance around the meaning of jihad [24]. Hence while there may be uniformity in the saliency of certain Islamic beliefs (e.g. jihad as a moral and spiritual battle) it does not mean that this will be expressed in similar ways i.e. used to legitimise violence.

http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/264/html

They’ve only gone and established an islamic state in Birmingham!!!

😆

What’s your point mefty – that racism is less socially acceptable in Britain? Something to be pleased about eh.

mefty – Member
How close to the truth is this?

Whole plate of chips in that article!

Some, but it’s exaggerated to make a point. I think there is a pretty strong case that some of CH more punchy material would have caused significant debate in this country and elsewhere and would have been deemed racist. This is based on precedent not personal opinion.

Dimbebly made this point on QT – would not be allowed under BBC guidelines for example (currently under review apparently)

Even in France, it raised more than a few eyebrows but at least there you can fly the national flag without it being perceived in a negative fashion.

wow, that spiked link is right up there with the most amount of garbage ive read from a link in this thread, or the threads actual contents.

i regret every second.

I would like to take this opportunity to apologise for Piers Morgan

All i really want is to be able to live peacefully with everyone.

Some more required reading, especially for binners.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/11/charie-hebdo-danger-polarised-debate-paris-attacks

I don’t see any data in that one so I’m ignoring it Grum.

I’ll listen to you when you produce data instead of baseless opinion, data would appear to disagree with your authors claim that…

Those who claim that Islam is “inherently”violent are more hateful, but no less nonsensical, than those who claim it is “inherently” peaceful. The insistence that these hateful acts are refuted by ancient texts makes as much sense as insisting they are supported by them. Islam, like any religion, isn’t “inherently” anything but what people make of it. A small but significant minority have decided to make it violent.

This is based on precedent not personal opinion

I agree with you but that just my opinion I cannot elevate it as high as that

you can fly the national flag without it being perceived in a negative fashion.

Scots and Welsh have no problem with theirs so its just the english one. Real shame it was surrender or claimed or taken by the racists. Basically a flag can symbolise [ that is all it is] different things in different countries, even within a union.

To be clear I am not gloating it is terrible that the racist got the flag and this perception exist. It should be reclaimed.

I don’t see any data in that one so I’m ignoring it Grum

I don’t see any data in that one so I’m ignoring it Tom

WILL PEOPLE PLEASE SAY WHEN THEY EDIT THEIR POSTS THAT WAS ALL YOU SAID ORIGINALLY TOM

I don’t see any data in that one so I’m ignoring it Tom

I mean it’s not the raw data.

As stated, this article employs data from the Pew Global Attitudes Survey 2010. Although this dataset represents a very general survey of respondents in 22 countries across the globe (n=24,790), this analysis draws specifically on the data from 7 countries that are classified in the Pew dataset as Muslim dominated, namely: Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Turkey; together they comprised 8,003 respondents. More specifically, the analysis uses the data of respondents who are Muslim in these Muslim countries. The final dataset used for the analyses comprised of 6,998 respondents.

Interesting article Grum, thanks for posting – after our lunchtime debate I will forward on to younger son. The final para was the essence of what we were discussing.

Don’t mention flags in NI (that’s Northern Ireland JY…I struggle to keep up with the abbreviations myself sometimes).

How does what you’ve posted contradict anything in the article I posted Tom? 😕

How does what you’ve posted contradict anything in the article I posted Tom?

It would seem that there is some evidence that Islam inherently encourages violent Jihad, which seems to conflict with your authors opinion.

But hey, when has anyone ever listened to evidence. 😆

Well post it then or STFU.

Go back and find it.

I can’t be arsed clicking the right-mouse button and finding paste again.

Given that the Muslim faith has different interpretations of jihad, your conclusion might need some revising?

Did you not post that article on the other thread Tom?

Tom_W1987 – Member
It would seem that there is some evidence that Islam inherently encourages violent Jihad, which seems to conflict with your authors opinion.

It also conflicts with what you posted earlier.

Tom_W1987 – Member
This is important to consider because there is an intense debate among Muslims and Islamic scholars as to how elements of the Quran should be interpreted, for instance around the meaning of jihad [24]. Hence while there may be uniformity in the saliency of certain Islamic beliefs (e.g. jihad as a moral and spiritual battle) it does not mean that this will be expressed in similar ways i.e. used to legitimise violence.

Yeah but I decided it would be more entertaining to post it in this one.

That’s the same article Lifer, might be an idea to read it properly, instead of picking a few sentences out of context.

What article? All you’ve posted is something about how there was a survey, but not what the results were. 😕

Are you just trolling again? :sigh: