Paris: Dozens Killed In Terrorist Attack

[Jayjay]

Who are non-muslims to judge what's Islam or not anyway?

Are you suggesting that only Muslims are morally permitted to say what Islam is?
But then, who judges who is a Muslim?

It's not about who has the moral high ground to judge other person's belief, but who has the epistemological high ground. Muslim A who thinks muslim B is not really a muslim is usually just making a religious statement that is meaningless outside the context of Muslim A's belief system. But at the same time muslims B might just as strongly feel the opposite, again in context of his own belief system. What's a person outside those belief systems to do? At best, we can take their self-identification at face value and agree that they are both muslims because they think they are.

To put it another way, it's not me that the moderate muslim needs to convince about what Islam is or isn't. That's a theological dispute and to an atheist about as relevant as how many angels can dance on a head of a pin.

 

[Nexus]

Tom, since you're not bending over backwards to defend Islam and Muslims worldwide you're an assumed right winger and he's asking about Israel because right wingers must instinctively support Israel.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Tom, since you're not bending over backwards to defend Islam and Muslims worldwide you're an assumed right winger and he's asking about Israel because right wingers must instinctively support Israel.

Hey, there's no problem in Israel that can't be solved by a decent sized meteor.

 

[Jarhyn]

Tom, since you're not bending over backwards to defend Islam and Muslims worldwide you're an assumed right winger and he's asking about Israel because right wingers must instinctively support Israel.

Hey, there's no problem in Israel that can't be solved by a decent sized meteor.

More like 'no problem in the ME and sub-Saharan Africa that can't bee solved that way. Problem is that that same thing would cause a lot of collateral damage. I would rather just have clean, cheap power solutions that nobody holds a monopoly on. Then the ME loses any international influence at all. So, we need nuclear energy, not nuclear bombs.

 

[iolo]

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?

Is it actually a religious doctrine? A high proportion of those who take part in terror attacks seem to know very little about Muslim belief, having devoted their lives to minor crime.

- - - Updated - - -

Tom, since you're not bending over backwards to defend Islam and Muslims worldwide you're an assumed right winger and he's asking about Israel because right wingers must instinctively support Israel.

Hey, there's no problem in Israel that can't be solved by a decent sized meteor.

Or a properly-organized war-crimes trial?

 

[Horatio Parker]

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.

Duh. But if the action has political aims, or political effects, it's a political action. And countries, even illegitimate ones like IS, are political entities. Are you suggesting that there were no political considerations in the Paris attacks?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

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?

Is it actually a religious doctrine? A high proportion of those who take part in terror attacks seem to know very little about Muslim belief, having devoted their lives to minor crime.

So, you're saying that the suicide bombers blew themselves up for non-religious reasons? How little they know about Muslim beliefs is irrelevant. It's how committed they are to the bit which they do know, or think they know, that matters.

If your motivation for stoning a woman to death is because the Bible says "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" and that's literally the only line you know from the Bible, you still did it because of your Christian beliefs. It was a religiously motivated murder.

 

[Jayjay]

Tom, since you're not bending over backwards to defend Islam and Muslims worldwide you're an assumed right winger and he's asking about Israel because right wingers must instinctively support Israel.

Hey, there's no problem in Israel that can't be solved by a decent sized meteor.

Or a properly-organized war-crimes trial?

A meteor is more likely.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Tom, since you're not bending over backwards to defend Islam and Muslims worldwide you're an assumed right winger and he's asking about Israel because right wingers must instinctively support Israel.

Hey, there's no problem in Israel that can't be solved by a decent sized meteor.

Or a properly-organized war-crimes trial?

A meteor is more likely.

Well, the odds of a meteor hitting a given area is aproximately 1:20,000,000,000,000.

So yes, that's a hell of a lot more likely than the odds of a properly organized war crimes trial against Israel happening.

 

[iolo]

Is it actually a religious doctrine? A high proportion of those who take part in terror attacks seem to know very little about Muslim belief, having devoted their lives to minor crime.

So, you're saying that the suicide bombers blew themselves up for non-religious reasons? How little they know about Muslim beliefs is irrelevant. It's how committed they are to the bit which they do know, or think they know, that matters.

If your motivation for stoning a woman to death is because the Bible says "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" and that's literally the only line you know from the Bible, you still did it because of your Christian beliefs. It was a religiously motivated murder.

It's a complex problem. Many people justify wicked actions by saying they are Christian, though they manifestly know nothing about Christianity, and I assume it is the same for 'Muslims'. Yes, in a sense it's 'religious', but can we blame the normal believers for the actions of weirdoes? Some would describe actions that are to me clearly political as matters of faith, like, say, the murder of Trotsky, and call Communism, say. 'a religion'. Probably the key point is that irrational and nasty acts require some sort of bullshit to back them up, or people would have problems with doing them.

 

[Trausti]

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has a doctorate in Islamic Studies from Islamic University of Baghdad. Probably knows something about the subject.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So, you're saying that the suicide bombers blew themselves up for non-religious reasons? How little they know about Muslim beliefs is irrelevant. It's how committed they are to the bit which they do know, or think they know, that matters.

If your motivation for stoning a woman to death is because the Bible says "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" and that's literally the only line you know from the Bible, you still did it because of your Christian beliefs. It was a religiously motivated murder.

It's a complex problem. Many people justify wicked actions by saying they are Christian, though they manifestly know nothing about Christianity, and I assume it is the same for 'Muslims'. Yes, in a sense it's 'religious', but can we blame the normal believers for the actions of weirdoes? Some would describe actions that are to me clearly political as matters of faith, like, say, the murder of Trotsky, and call Communism, say. 'a religion'. Probably the key point is that irrational and nasty acts require some sort of bullshit to back them up, or people would have problems with doing them.

Right. When, however, that bullshit is religious bullshit, then it's a religiously motivated behaviour.

You don't need to be a theological scholar to engage in religiously motivated behaviour. You just need to do something because you believe that a religion says that you should do that something. It doesn't even matter if there's no support for your claim that a religion says to do that thing. If you think it does and that's what motivates you, then it's a religiously motivated behaviour.

- - - Updated - - -

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has a doctorate in Islamic Studies from Islamic University of Baghdad. Probably knows something about the subject.

Oh, get a grip, dude. Everybody knows that UB is just a party school. A doctorate from that place isn't worth shit.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's a complex problem. Many people justify wicked actions by saying they are Christian, though they manifestly know nothing about Christianity, and I assume it is the same for 'Muslims'. Yes, in a sense it's 'religious', but can we blame the normal believers for the actions of weirdoes? Some would describe actions that are to me clearly political as matters of faith, like, say, the murder of Trotsky, and call Communism, say. 'a religion'. Probably the key point is that irrational and nasty acts require some sort of bullshit to back them up, or people would have problems with doing them.

Right. When, however, that bullshit is religious bullshit, then it's a religiously motivated behaviour.

You don't need to be a theological scholar to engage in religiously motivated behaviour. You just need to do something because you believe that a religion says that you should do that something. It doesn't even matter if there's no support for your claim that a religion says to do that thing. If you think it does and that's what motivates you, then it's a religiously motivated behaviour.

- - - Updated - - -

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has a doctorate in Islamic Studies from Islamic University of Baghdad. Probably knows something about the subject.

Oh, get a grip, dude. Everybody knows that UB is just a party school. A doctorate from that place isn't worth shit.

Nonsense the UB is a top university with a world rating of No 701
http://www.topuniversities.com/node/3553/ranking-details/world-university-rankings/2014

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Nonsense the UB is a top university with a world rating of No 701
http://www.topuniversities.com/node/3553/ranking-details/world-university-rankings/2014

And they could have cracked the top 700 if they hadn't had all those keggers during the exam periods.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Duh. But if the action has political aims, or political effects, it's a political action. And countries, even illegitimate ones like IS, are political entities. Are you suggesting that there were no political considerations in the Paris attacks?

Yes, and if it has religious aims, or religious effects, it's a religious action. And people, even illegitimate ones like IS members, can be religious entities. Are you suggesting that there were no religious considerations in the Paris attacks?

The two things aren't somehow mutally exclusive.

 

[maxparrish]

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 embarrassment 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.

Ummmm...no. The headline says they 800,000 Muslims, not just Chechens, were staging protests...presumably centered in Gronzy and Chechnya. There are 1.2 million in Chechnya, and 16 million Muslims in Russia. Depending on their proximity to Gronzy, it is entirely possible.

From the article's source, Daily Mail "Meanwhile, in Grozny, protesters marched through the streets of downtown Grozny, releasing balloons and carrying posters that read 'Hands off our beloved prophet' and 'Europe has only united us'.

'More than 800,000 people took part in the event in the centre of Grozny,' the Russian interior ministry said.

On Friday, Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov wrote on his official Instagram account that those who defended Charlie Hebdo were his 'personal enemies', and vowed that at least 1 million people would join the government-sponsored protest in Grozny."

Be it 400,000 or 800,000 or 1,600,000 Muslim marchers, who is dodging the question asked, hmmmm?

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

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...azine-record-SEVEN-MILLION.html#ixzz3rgyCkqtz
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Wait, so now we're believing the Russian Interior Ministry?

If they said there were 800,000 prostestors, there were probably just a couple dozen and the officials siphoned off all the extra money they claimed to use for security personell into their own bank accounts.

Do we actually have any external verification of the size of the protest (Dutch accounts not included)?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015...opean-nationals-according-to-top-eu-official/

All of the attackers from Friday’s massacre in Paris so far have been identified as European Union nationals, according to a top EU official. The announcement further casts doubt on the validity of a Syrian passport found near the bodies of a slain attacker.

“Let me underline, the profile of the terrorists so far identified tells us this is an internal threat,” Federica Mogherini, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, said after a meeting with EU foreign ministers. “It is all EU citizens so far. This can change with the hours, but so far it is quite clear it is an issue of internal domestic security.”

The Egyptian passport found was that of a victim.

 

[credoconsolans]

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

Wiki Mahdi

Just did. It says,

"There is no explicit reference to the Mahdi in the Qu'ran..."

That is, there is no apocalyptic reference in the Qu'ran itself. Just undocumented traditional beliefs outside the Qu'ran.

Rather like the "Rapture" being a popular Christian tenet, while not being in the bible at all.

 

[Trausti]

Wiki Mahdi

Just did. It says,

"There is no explicit reference to the Mahdi in the Qu'ran..."

That is, there is no apocalyptic reference in the Qu'ran itself. Just undocumented traditional beliefs outside the Qu'ran.

Rather like the "Rapture" being a popular Christian tenet, while not being in the bible at all.

Yeah, well, depending on your Islamic flavor, the Mahdi is popular belief:

Shiite

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/06/24/irans-ahmadinejad-says-the-u-s-is-out-to-get-the-hidden-imam-who-um-disappeared-in-the-10th-century/

Sunni

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ahmad

But the Mahdi doesn't really factor into ISIS. There just about reestablishing the caliphate and cutting off infidel heads.