Paris: Dozens Killed In Terrorist Attack

[Trausti]

The discussion is becoming irrelevant to the topic of what happened in Paris. It doesn't matter what muslims think of their religion anymore than it mattered what Hebrews thought of their religion or christens theirs or classical religious believers thought of theirs. Europe warred on itself for century upon century upon century when it was Christian all the time. The question is why. And it wasn't because of religion. And it isn't today.

Eh, Europe had plenty of internal wars over religion. Even without religion, there'd be war. It's what humans do. But this most recent Paris attack had a lot to do with religion. Religion is the reason ISIS exists. I don't understand why we don't take their word on it.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The discussion is becoming irrelevant to the topic of what happened in Paris. It doesn't matter what muslims think of their religion anymore than it mattered what Hebrews thought of their religion or christens theirs or classical religious believers thought of theirs. Europe warred on itself for century upon century upon century when it was Christian all the time. The question is why. And it wasn't because of religion. And it isn't today.

But religion is the motivating factor in their actions. You don't have Belgians and Syrians giving a shit that Americans bombed and tortured a bunch of Iraqis, you have Muslims giving a shit that Americans bombed and tortured a bunch of Muslims. They're doing these things in order to join in on a holy war, so the holy part of it can't be brushed aside.

While it's true that without religion, you'd still have other people killing other groups of people for other reasons, we're talking about these specific people who did these specific killing for these specific reasons. Those reasons are centered around their religion.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The discussion is becoming irrelevant to the topic of what happened in Paris. It doesn't matter what muslims think of their religion anymore than it mattered what Hebrews thought of their religion or christens theirs or classical religious believers thought of theirs. Europe warred on itself for century upon century upon century when it was Christian all the time. The question is why. And it wasn't because of religion. And it isn't today.

Eh, Europe had plenty of internal wars over religion. Even without religion, there'd be war. It's what humans do. But this most recent Paris attack had a lot to do with religion. Religion is the reason ISIS exists. I don't understand why we don't take their word on it.

We're not the only species that makes war on itself. Are those species religious too?

 

[maxparrish]

So, your rebuttal is to say that the people who don't really care and don't want anything to change aren't really doing anything?

There's nothing to rebutt. You're expecting people who have no relation to the terrorists to make a show of that obvious fact and upholding it with an irrelevant comparison. American citizens are (at least in aggregate) inherently complicit in the action of the government they elected in the same way a board member of a company is complicit in the actions of their employees (at least if those follow company guidelines).

Demanding that Muslims everywhere spontanuously take to the streets whenever there's a terrorist attack anywhere in the world where the perpetrators claim to be acting in the name of Islam is absurd. It's every bit as absurd as demanding that you take to the streets every single time an atrocity is committed against gays in the name of "protecting families" - because as a family person yourself, you're inherently complicit and if your action is too lame, it only shows that you "don't want anything to change".

You are correct, one should not expect a 5th column to turnout against fellow Muslims killing the citizens of the country that is giving them a life. What kind of Muslim are you if you can't bite the hand that feeds you (aka - spit on those who invite you into their house)?

Of course, there are a few Muslims who at least try. A couple of months ago, in Ireland, a rally to reject terrorism by Muslims was organized. The Irish Muslim Peace and Integration Council sought to protes ISIS. The turnout was...ummmmm...less than disappointing. Not 5000 or 500 but "up to" 50 people showed up. According to the Irish Examiner, the Irish Muslim Peace and Integration Council “faced resistance from a few members of the Islamic community, while promoting the event.” Not just verbal resistance, either: “Organisers said that a member of the council was assaulted by someone at a mosque who claimed to support ‘ISIS’, while he was handing out leaflets to promote today’s protest against terrorism.”

My...my...active resistance to opposing ISIS?

And others have had similar responses: "In October 2014 in Houston, a rally against the Islamic State organized by the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) drew the grand total of ten people. In August 2013 in Boston, about 25 Muslims rallied against “misperceptions” that Islam was violent. About the same number showed up in June 2013 at a progressive Muslim rally in Toronto to claim that their religion had been “hijacked.”"

On the other hand, regarding Charlie Hebdo jihad massacre of Muhammad cartoonists in January 2015, headlined stories included:

Chechnya: 800,000 Muslims protest Muhammad cartoons; protests also in Iran, Pakistan, Ingushetia, elsewhere

Pakistan: 10,000 Muslims protest against Charlie Hebdo’s Muhammad cartoons

Australia: 1,000 Muslims rally against Charlie Hebdo and the freedom of speech


http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/07/r...lim-moderates-rally-against-terror-in-ireland

So where are these masses of liberty loving, anti-terrorist, Muslims? The search for this unicorn continues.

 

[Horatio Parker]

The discussion is becoming irrelevant to the topic of what happened in Paris. It doesn't matter what muslims think of their religion anymore than it mattered what Hebrews thought of their religion or christens theirs or classical religious believers thought of theirs. Europe warred on itself for century upon century upon century when it was Christian all the time. The question is why. And it wasn't because of religion. And it isn't today.

But religion is the motivating factor in their actions. You don't have Belgians and Syrians giving a shit that Americans bombed and tortured a bunch of Iraqis, you have Muslims giving a shit that Americans bombed and tortured a bunch of Muslims. They're doing these things in order to join in on a holy war, so the holy part of it can't be brushed aside.

While it's true that without religion, you'd still have other people killing other groups of people for other reasons, we're talking about these specific people who did these specific killing for these specific reasons. Those reasons are centered around their religion.

Muslim extremists kill more Muslims than westerners. How indignant was the west when the approx same number of people were killed by IS suicide bombers in Turkey? Or the 43 dead in Lebanon? Or the 131 killed by the Saudis bombing a wedding in Yemen? Boko Haram massacred 2000 people in January.

Why should Muslims care more about western dead than their own? We don't.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

But religion is the motivating factor in their actions. You don't have Belgians and Syrians giving a shit that Americans bombed and tortured a bunch of Iraqis, you have Muslims giving a shit that Americans bombed and tortured a bunch of Muslims. They're doing these things in order to join in on a holy war, so the holy part of it can't be brushed aside.

While it's true that without religion, you'd still have other people killing other groups of people for other reasons, we're talking about these specific people who did these specific killing for these specific reasons. Those reasons are centered around their religion.

Muslim extremists kill more Muslims than westerners. How indignant was the west when the approx same number of people were killed by IS suicide bombers in Turkey? Or the 43 dead in Lebanon? Or the 131 killed by the Saudis bombing a wedding in Yemen? Boko Haram massacred 2000 people in January.

Why should Muslims care more about western dead than their own? We don't.

Hence my point about the argument that they care being invalid.

The ones who did the killings in Paris, however, cared about Western dead and the reason that they cared was religiously motivated and that's the topic of the thread.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

The discussion is becoming irrelevant to the topic of what happened in Paris. It doesn't matter what muslims think of their religion anymore than it mattered what Hebrews thought of their religion or christens theirs or classical religious believers thought of theirs. Europe warred on itself for century upon century upon century when it was Christian all the time. The question is why. And it wasn't because of religion. And it isn't today.

Except ISIS followers have an apocalyptic belief system based on their holy text. You can't just ignore that. So yes, it is about religion.

 

[Jokodo]

Chechnya: 800,000 Muslims protest Muhammad cartoons; protests also in Iran, Pakistan, Ingushetia, elsewhere


So where are these masses of liberty loving, anti-terrorist, Muslims? The search for this unicorn continues.

Sorry, but that's obviously bullshit. 800k is like the entire Chechen population excluding infants and immobile elderly people. It's logistically impossible to have 800,000 demonstrate in Grozny.

I tiny bit of common sense could have saved you the embarassment of spreading obvious (to anyone with a cursory knowledge of the world outside the US) misinformation from obviously dubitable sources. Maybe you can learn for next time.

 

[credoconsolans]

The discussion is becoming irrelevant to the topic of what happened in Paris. It doesn't matter what muslims think of their religion anymore than it mattered what Hebrews thought of their religion or christens theirs or classical religious believers thought of theirs. Europe warred on itself for century upon century upon century when it was Christian all the time. The question is why. And it wasn't because of religion. And it isn't today.

Except ISIS followers have an apocalyptic belief system based on their holy text. You can't just ignore that. So yes, it is about religion.

Is Islam apocalyptic? I didn't think it was.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Except ISIS followers have an apocalyptic belief system based on their holy text. You can't just ignore that. So yes, it is about religion.

Is Islam apocalyptic? I didn't think it was.

But ISIS members think that it is. The fact that other interpretations of Islam disagree with them about this matter doesn't affect that.

 

[JonA]

Yes. Better to let a group of pedophile mass murders dictate how you should live rather than grow a spine.

This is really a no brainer. The insane actions by the West and former colonial governments in Europe to instigage regime change resulted in a vacuum which has been filled by fanatics and their malitias who would otherwise have been virtually unknown. If you want to see this now, take a look at Syria. Al Qaeda and ISIS after the West decided on regime change.

Even if true, a vacuum's just a vacuum.

And it was certainly not the West that decided what should fill that supposed vacuum.

 

[jonatha]

Except ISIS followers have an apocalyptic belief system based on their holy text. You can't just ignore that. So yes, it is about religion.

Is Islam apocalyptic? I didn't think it was.

Wiki Mahdi

 

[Nice Squirrel]

This is really a no brainer. The insane actions by the West and former colonial governments in Europe to instigage regime change resulted in a vacuum which has been filled by fanatics and their malitias who would otherwise have been virtually unknown. If you want to see this now, take a look at Syria. Al Qaeda and ISIS after the West decided on regime change.

Even if true, a vacuum's just a vacuum.

And it was certainly not the West that decided what should fill that supposed vacuum.

And historically it is the most vicious, violent oppressive regimes that fill said vacuum.

I predicted this 13 years ago. It really wasn't that an insightful a prediction, but a no-brainer prediction.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Muslim extremists kill more Muslims than westerners. How indignant was the west when the approx same number of people were killed by IS suicide bombers in Turkey? Or the 43 dead in Lebanon? Or the 131 killed by the Saudis bombing a wedding in Yemen? Boko Haram massacred 2000 people in January.

Why should Muslims care more about western dead than their own? We don't.

Hence my point about the argument that they care being invalid.

The ones who did the killings in Paris, however, cared about Western dead and the reason that they cared was religiously motivated and that's the topic of the thread.

When Israel bombs Gaza or assassinates a Hamas figure, is that a religiously motivated action?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Hence my point about the argument that they care being invalid.

The ones who did the killings in Paris, however, cared about Western dead and the reason that they cared was religiously motivated and that's the topic of the thread.

When Israel bombs Gaza or assassinates a Hamas figure, is that a religiously motivated action?

OK, congratulations. You win the "Well, that was a random and unrelated aside" award for the week.

To answer, however, it would depend why they did it. If they did it for a religious reason, then it would be a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be.

It's the same when somebody shoots a bunch of people. If they did it for a religious reason, then it's a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be. For instance, a few days ago in Paris, some people shot some other people for religiously motivated reasons. In America a few weeks ago (and again a few weeks from now), some people shot some other people for other reasons.

 

[iolo]

It was decided on the basis of lies and was contrary to international law, as you know.

It was. That's not relevant to my point though. Given that the entities that decided were elected in a fairly democratic process by the citizens of the US and UK (and a few other countries), it was reasonable for an outsider to assume that any British or American citizen randomly picked off the street had a chance of >50% of supporting the invasion. Therefore, if you don't want that perception applied to you, you gotta do something about it.

It is not reasonable to assume that a French Muslim randomly picked off the street today supports the recent attacks because the attackers were not voted in to carry them out by the aggregate of French Muslims. Therefore, a Muslim in France (or elsewhere) shouldn't have to do anything to clear themselves of the association with the terrorists - he or she is clear by default.

In the case of the UK, only a blind and deaf outsider who'd never been near the place could believe there was any chance of a majority's supporting the War Crime, but I do take your general point.

 

[iolo]

When Israel bombs Gaza or assassinates a Hamas figure, is that a religiously motivated action?

OK, congratulations. You win the "Well, that was a random and unrelated aside" award for the week.

To answer, however, it would depend why they did it. If they did it for a religious reason, then it would be a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be.

It's the same when somebody shoots a bunch of people. If they did it for a religious reason, then it's a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be. For instance, a few days ago in Paris, some people shot some other people for religiously motivated reasons. In America a few weeks ago (and again a few weeks from now), some people shot some other people for other reasons.

As the Northern Protestants believe the IRA fought for religious reasons. To my mind, it is a badly-informed reaction to colonialist bullying and thieving taking place in cultures where politics was forced into the Mosque by Western interference, as in Iran when they overthrew Mr Mossadeqh.

 

[Horatio Parker]

When Israel bombs Gaza or assassinates a Hamas figure, is that a religiously motivated action?

OK, congratulations. You win the "Well, that was a random and unrelated aside" award for the week.

To answer, however, it would depend why they did it. If they did it for a religious reason, then it would be a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be.

It's the same when somebody shoots a bunch of people. If they did it for a religious reason, then it's a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be. For instance, a few days ago in Paris, some people shot some other people for religiously motivated reasons. In America a few weeks ago (and again a few weeks from now), some people shot some other people for other reasons.

Not an aside. Israel is a religious state; so is IS. So if operations carried out by IS are religiously actions, why would not Israel's? Unless you're suggesting that there is no political motive or consideration in the Paris attacks.

Or, to be a religiously motivation attack, does it only have to have religious rhetoric in its press releases or be carried out by believers?

The motivation for IS to have a state and be engaged in politics is religious, as is Israel's, but that doesn't make their actions religious.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

OK, congratulations. You win the "Well, that was a random and unrelated aside" award for the week.

To answer, however, it would depend why they did it. If they did it for a religious reason, then it would be a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be.

It's the same when somebody shoots a bunch of people. If they did it for a religious reason, then it's a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be. For instance, a few days ago in Paris, some people shot some other people for religiously motivated reasons. In America a few weeks ago (and again a few weeks from now), some people shot some other people for other reasons.

As the Northern Protestants believe the IRA fought for religious reasons. To my mind, it is a badly-informed reaction to colonialist bullying and thieving taking place in cultures where politics was forced into the Mosque by Western interference, as in Iran when they overthrew Mr Mossadeqh.

So what? How does the fact that non-religious factors led to the establishment of the religious doctrine which motivates ISIS followers change the fact that they are motivated by a religious doctrine?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

OK, congratulations. You win the "Well, that was a random and unrelated aside" award for the week.

To answer, however, it would depend why they did it. If they did it for a religious reason, then it would be a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be.

It's the same when somebody shoots a bunch of people. If they did it for a religious reason, then it's a religiously motivated action. If they did it for some other reason, then it would not be. For instance, a few days ago in Paris, some people shot some other people for religiously motivated reasons. In America a few weeks ago (and again a few weeks from now), some people shot some other people for other reasons.

Not an aside. Israel is a religious state; so is IS. So if operations carried out by IS are religiously actions, why would not Israel's? Unless you're suggesting that there is no political motive or consideration in the Paris attacks.

Or, to be a religiously motivation attack, does it only have to have religious rhetoric in its press releases or be carried out by believers?

The motivation for IS to have a state and be engaged in politics is religious, as is Israel's, but that doesn't make their actions religious.

Well, that's like saying that stoning a witch to death because the Bible tells you to is a legal action and not a religious action.

If the religious doctrine is what motivates the people to act, then it is a religiously motivated action, regardless of what led to their following of that religious doctrine.