Charlie Hebdo

VTech

@slowmart, Your point is perfect although I have no answer for that. I had a chat with some friends on saturday and the topic of the scrapes we got into as kids came up and I was asked if I ever felt scared for my life growing up and I said no, the worst I worried about was a black eye or a smacked nose. I never once thought about being stabbed, shot, attacked etc and I grew up in the council estates of birmingham.
The world is definitely changing.

ballysmate

VTech wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

VTech wrote:

Just to be make those that think differently. I have never "kowtow'd" in anything.

I honestly think this forum shows a huge amount of racism but that in itself doesn't bother me because as a realist, I realise that this is normal across the world so why should I think here is any different.
The real issue is just how much pleasure people mss out on through these thoughts and wrongful opinions. How many friends, acquaintances and travels do so many people miss because they think every muslim wants to blow them up. Its remarkable when you really get down to brass tacks.

It was the same when I was growing up, I'm 42 now and when I was in senior school we had only 1 black lad who was my best mate, been mates ever since and just think how much I would have missed had I been the same as so many kids at school who called him names. they are the ones to feel sorry for, they missed seeing his kids born and grow into great kids themselves. They missed having great times and travelling and getting drunk, getting into trouble, sad times, good times. they missed it all.
So many here dislike me because they think I'm rich and they are right, I am rich.

The real issue is their misunderstanding.
They think I'm rich because I've done ok and have a few quid but thats stupid, non important, nonsense.

I am rich because I have friends from different backgrounds and share so many times with them. You simply can't buy that no matter how much you have in the bank.

Just what does that have to do with terrorists?

I guess you haven't read through this post.
Terrorism is bad, very bad.
Muslims are as bad as christians and jews in that some are bad but most are good.
This reflects life in general, most people are good and the simple fact is that a few are bad. Its disgusting how many people here are openly racist.

I have probably been one of the most critical on here of the way the terrorists draw succour from their religion, but please show me where I have posted anything racist. I disagree vehemently that 'we' should give any group a free pass and make them a special case just because of religion, any religion.
Some people advocate allowing some religious groups a special case and to me , that is contrary to our ideals and way of life.
There is no greater enemy to an open mind than religion and some people on here prove that perfectly.

bartman100

VTech wrote:

@slowmart, Your point is perfect although I have no answer for that. I had a chat with some friends on saturday and the topic of the scrapes we got into as kids came up and I was asked if I ever felt scared for my life growing up and I said no, the worst I worried about was a black eye or a smacked nose. I never once thought about being stabbed, shot, attacked etc and I grew up in the council estates of birmingham.
The world is definitely changing.

Yes, it definitely is, but not necessarily in the way you might think:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... ceful.html

finchy

There's a big difference between being racist and opposed to aspects of a different culture. Racism implies that the only solution to a perceived problem is the removal of a particular group from society.

Being opposed to aspects of a culture, OTOH, allows for progress to be made by people in that culture. So, for example, I believe that as the Muslim world develops economically, people will gradually apply less extreme interpretations to their religion, just as has happened with Christianity over the past few centuries.

slowmart

bartman100 wrote:

Yes, it definitely is, but not necessarily in the way you might think:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... ceful.html[/quote]



Interesting link.

Arguably war, or more to the point, how influence is extended is changing.

The threat of sanctions are a powerful deterrent or the potential lifting thereafter is effective leverage. Deploying tactical tools such as cyber attacks may compound and further isolate the regime in question. Look at Iran and Libya as examples.

Our nature remains, how we wage war is different although the news is coloured by the positioning from the differing news agencies or political agenda's of the day.

finchy

Slowmart wrote:

Our nature remains,

What is our nature?

ballysmate

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... LLION.html

"Death to French" and burning effigies of French leaders is ok but a cartoon of Muhammad not?

Of course, nothing to do with Islam at all. no siree, nothing at all. :roll:


Edit: Forgot to mention churches being burnt. There's tolerance for you.

VTech

Ballysmate wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2916562/Incredible-scenes-tens-thousands-gather-protest-against-Charlie-Hebdo-Chechnya-day-revealed-print-run-magazine-record-SEVEN-MILLION.html

"Death to French" and burning effigies of French leaders is ok but a cartoon of Muhammad not?

Of course, nothing to do with Islam at all. no siree, nothing at all. :roll:


Edit: Forgot to mention churches being burnt. There's tolerance for you.

Ahhh, I'm learning, its taking me time but I'm learning.
your point is the passage of "an eye for an eye" ?

Charlie Hebdo have committed a crime by islamic law by using an effigy of Mohamed which is wrong in THIER law.
I am not, nor have I ever said I agree with this, I honestly think CB have made a huge mistake that will end up with some poor soul being killed.

What they have done is wrong, legally wrong and morally wrong. In the UK it wouldn't have happened and although I do think we are too soft in the UK on certain subjects, I think going out of their way to wind up and offend a large proportion of the planet is probably not the wisest of moves.

Anonymous

It is not legally wrong. Islamic teachings to not cover what is illegal or not in France. It could be deemed morally wrong, but then indoctrinating your children with waffle about god is more wrong in my book.

Anonymous

Also I read this recently from a chain email. The 2nd part is drivel and too implied, so I have removed it.

Very few people were true Nazis,’ he said, ‘but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come.’

‘My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.’

‘We are told again and again by ‘experts’ and ‘talking heads’ that Islam is a religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.’

‘The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honour-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.’

‘The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the ‘silent majority,’ is cowed and extraneous. Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

China’s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.’

‘The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery? Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were ‘peace loving’?

‘History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.’

‘Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.’

ballysmate

I'm not interested in any "eye for an eye"
If the people of Iran, Chechnya or anywhere else wish to protest, that is their right. Burn flags? Fill yer boots. All I am asking is that we in the west are able to express our views.
Just to be clear, I pointed out the burning of churches to show their intolerance, while demanding that everyone tolerate every nuance of their beliefs.

bianchimoon

Ballysmate wrote:

I'm not interested in any "eye for an eye"
If the people of Iran, Chechnya or anywhere else wish to protest, that is their right. Burn flags? Fill yer boots. All I am asking is that we in the west are able to express our views.
Just to be clear, I pointed out the burning of churches to show their intolerance, while demanding that everyone tolerate every nuance of their beliefs.

+1, but you're wasting your time

VTech

bianchimoon wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

I'm not interested in any "eye for an eye"
If the people of Iran, Chechnya or anywhere else wish to protest, that is their right. Burn flags? Fill yer boots. All I am asking is that we in the west are able to express our views.
Just to be clear, I pointed out the burning of churches to show their intolerance, while demanding that everyone tolerate every nuance of their beliefs.

+1, but you're wasting your time

Absolutely, because he used the term I pointed out the burning of churches to show their intolerance which had the sole purpose of putting all muslims into the same category which doesn't help.
People will not listen if you go out of your way to section an entire group of people, this also isn't the true reality.
I can assure you that their are plenty of muslims who cry at the thought of the french people being killed in the name of Islam, just as I can assure you that plenty of Germans cried at the killing of Jews in WW2.

The problem is, as we have since found out, that not all Germans were bad, so much so that I married one.

ddraver

Sorry What?

ballysmate

VTech wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

I'm not interested in any "eye for an eye"
If the people of Iran, Chechnya or anywhere else wish to protest, that is their right. Burn flags? Fill yer boots. All I am asking is that we in the west are able to express our views.
Just to be clear, I pointed out the burning of churches to show their intolerance, while demanding that everyone tolerate every nuance of their beliefs.

+1, but you're wasting your time

Absolutely, because he used the term I pointed out the burning of churches to show their intolerance which had the sole purpose of putting all muslims into the same category which doesn't help.
People will not listen if you go out of your way to section an entire group of people, this also isn't the true reality.
I can assure you that their are plenty of muslims who cry at the thought of the french people being killed in the name of Islam, just as I can assure you that plenty of Germans cried at the killing of Jews in WW2.

The problem is, as we have since found out, that not all Germans were bad, so much so that I married one.

VTech, did I say that all Muslims were involved in the burning of churches? No I did not.
I pointed out the irony of people burning places of worship to demonstrate against a perceived intolerance or slight on their own religion.
Please don't read things that aren't there.

In respect of your reference to Nazi Germany, if you care to look at p18 of this thread, one of my posts contained the following.

No one can seriously suggest that all Muslims are terrorists or if you prefer, extremists. But the problem is that these terrorists draw legitimacy from Islam. It is surely in the Islamic community's best interests to denounce, isolate and help to neutralise the terrorists? All too often we hear people excuse their actions on the grounds that they were provoked, defending Islam or not true Muslims.
In the 30s, the Nazis were a minority extremist group and I wouldn't be surprised if people across Europe were saying, "They don't speak for real Germans". The sentiment was true, they didn't speak for all Germans, all Germans weren't Nazis. The German people had the power to halt the Nazis but missed the opportunity. The rest, they say, is history.

VTech

But your reference doesn't disassociate muslims to terrorists does it.
Good and bad in all races is the reality, muslims have the right to burn flags in my opinion because they have been treated badly by Charlie Hebdo causing them offence.
It changes when offence and attacks take place which isn't muslim behaviour, its terrorist behaviour.

Its the same globally, time or location doesn't disassociate either because in my 40 years nothing has changed apart from the media coverage with modern technology. In WW1 and WW2 british soldiers committed terrible atrocities but due to the fact we won and we didn't use the video technology like the germans there really isn't the viewable proof.

This isn't about sides, all religions have bad people but we should never segregate any of them because that spells doom.

mamba80

VTech wrote:

But your reference doesn't disassociate muslims to terrorists does it.
Good and bad in all races is the reality, muslims have the right to burn flags in my opinion because they have been treated badly by Charlie Hebdo causing them offence.
It changes when offence and attacks take place which isn't muslim behaviour, its terrorist behaviour.

Its the same globally, time or location doesn't disassociate either because in my 40 years nothing has changed apart from the media coverage with modern technology. In WW1 and WW2 british soldiers committed terrible atrocities but due to the fact we won and we didn't use the video technology like the germans there really isn't the viewable proof.

This isn't about sides, all religions have bad people but we should never segregate any of them because that spells doom.

Well perhaps the majority of muslims are peace loving and have no intention of trying to introduce Sharia law in the west BUT their problem in convincing the rest of us is that when their leaders do speak out and condem murderous acts, its almost always with a caveat.
they even complained at the very moderate letter written to Muslim leaders by Eric Pickles.
Maybe the media doesnt make their condemnations front page news but i just dont hear UK Muslim leaders speaking out against these fanatics, infact the few who did condem CH, have been subject to abuse from within their own community.
As for the condemnation and protests of the CH/france by Chechnya,that is a joke, Kadyrov is implicated in many war crimes and in assinations of opponents who live abroad, inc Anna Politkovskaya, a well known russian jounalist.

He is exactly the sort of guy that does give Islam a bad name.

ballysmate

"Death to French" and burning effigies of French leaders is ok but a cartoon of Muhammad not?

Of course, nothing to do with Islam at all. no siree, nothing at all. :roll:


Edit: Forgot to mention churches being burnt. There's tolerance for you.

Where did i say these people were terrorists?

Here's what I said about burning flags.

If the people of Iran, Chechnya or anywhere else wish to protest, that is their right. Burn flags? Fill yer boots. All I am asking is that we in the west are able to express our views.

As regards British troops committing atrocities during WW1 & 2, I am sure some did, but what has that to do with the suppression of free speech you seem to advocate?

As regards your last point re segregation of religions, I couldn't agree more. We should all be able to either worship as we wish or to question every facet of religion or even to treat every religion with contempt if that is our belief.

bernithebiker

Interestingly a French Muslim working in security at Marseille airport has just been jailed for 2 years for sympathising with the terrorists of 11 Jan.

Might want to avoid flying through there for a bit.....

pblakeney

In my opinion this is all about where do you draw a line?

For some terrorists it is cartoons.

For a Muslim spokesman it is building snowmen.

Today we found out that for ISIS it is watching a game of football.

At what point do we draw a line in the sand and say no more?

I would say that we have passed that point.
The silent majority, any silent majority, needs to stop being silent.

ballysmate

PBlakeney wrote:

In my opinion this is all about where do you draw a line?

For some terrorists it is cartoons.

For a Muslim spokesman it is building snowmen.

Today we found out that for ISIS it is watching a game of football.

At what point do we draw a line in the sand and say no more?

I would say that we have passed that point.
The silent majority, any silent majority, needs to stop being silent.

This, a thousand times, this.

ballysmate

bernithebiker wrote:

Interestingly a French Muslim working in security at Marseille airport has just been jailed for 2 years for sympathising with the terrorists of 11 Jan.

Might want to avoid flying through there for a bit.....

Five Chechens suspected of planning terror attack are arrested in France with explosives found near a stadium in Montpellier.
No idea what religion they follow.

mr_goo

VTech wrote:

CYCLESPORT1 wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

If these translations are accurate, how can any religion that exhorts its followers to slay unbelievers, condones slavery and treats half the worlds population as chattels be worth a w@nk?
If I formed a political party along those lines, I would quite rightly cause outrage and probably face arrest. So why is it acceptable from religion?
We have put up with this bollox for long enough.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Koran from about the same time that slavery was common in Christian lands indeed it was a major part of their economy as late as 1700's? Not too far from me there is a farmhouse which was owned by someone involved in slavery back in the day, IIRC the farm was used to store slaves at one point if the stories are true, and they found skulls from slaves used in the building as infill/backfill and even as non-loadbearing bricks within the fabric of the buildings. Then round the coast a bit in Cumbria there is Whitehaven the second most important port back in the day as it was the main port involved in slave trade/triangle. Off topic though but those events were a damn site closer in time than when the Quran was written.

Also, if you want I am sure there is mention of slavery in the religious texts of most main religions that date from times long past. I wonder how many Muslims still consider slavery acceptable even though it seems to say it is in their religious texts?

IIRC Britain has a bit of an issue with slavery right now too. Are we as bad as Muslims too for allowing it to happen?

As far as I am concerned Muslims are just like other religions in that they select the bits of their religious texts that they wish to follow and believe. You want slavery pick those bits, if not then don;t. Same applies for other things like adultery, homosexuality and I am sure some even have things to say about disabled, well wouldn;t surprise me at all. I am a committed atheist but I see good and bad in all religions. Take a look at Alain de Botton;s book called Religion for Atheists, worth a read if you are religious or atheist I think.

You don't see beheading at our local C of E church :P It's now 2015 we grew out of it (except Muslims)

And people here still think I am in the wrong yet this is ok ?
Muslims do not behead people, bad muslims do that.
Just like white people don't rape women, bad white people do that.

No wonder there is separation amongst us. What hope for the future and our children if we as adults can't see the differences that are right in fronton our eyes.

I went to an event yesterday with around 500 muslims, I can swear on my children that I didn't see a single beheading.

Vtech.
Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, Dubai, Kuwait are all states dominated by the Muslim faith. Saudi subscribes to the most extreme form of Islam, whereby females are subjugated to second class citizens. Homosexuals are persecuted, arrested and then executed. Thiefs and criminals are subjected to having their hands cut off on Friday afternoon after prayers. Adulterers are stoned to death, but only the female. Those that criticise the Muslim faith are sentenced to extreme punishment (1000 lashes at 50 per week, see current news story). And murderers are beheaded. This is all done by the STATE. Who are made up of a king and hundreds of princes. And I wouldn't mind betting that some of them are your customers..... Are they good or bad Muslims?.... I would love to know.

And as for accusations of racism on here. I haven't seen any. But I have seen and contributed to criticism of a certain religion and how it is changing the social make up of Western Europe.

And one more thing which I will direct to all of you. There has been talk by the government and the press in the rise of Anti-Semitism, and this has been compared to Islamaphobia.
Could I point out that Anti-Semitism is the hatred and the persecution of the Jews (see Nazi Germany).
Islamaphobia is misplaced in its comparison. It is a fear of Islam and how it is changing our way of life. A democratic, socially open and fair society, which took 500 to 700 years to achieve. And could disappear in a few decades. That is why there is a rise in Islamaphobia. Its not hatred, its pure fear. And justifiable in my opinion.

bianchimoon

not to pour petrol on the fire but in one of todays papers it was reported that a street entertainer was given lashes for playing an electronic keyboard as it's deemed un islamic by IS as are the people arrested for keeping pigeons! and a man thrown off the roof for being gay
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... board.html

pblakeney

bianchimoon wrote:

not to pour petrol on the fire but in one of todays papers it was reported that a street entertainer was given lashes for playing an electronic keyboard as it's deemed un islamic by IS as are the people arrested for keeping pigeons! and a man thrown off the roof for being gay
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... board.html

The basic fact these days is that ISIS will punish anyone that is not ISIS.
I am not even sure that being ISIS makes you safe.

RDW

It is a fear of Islam and how it is changing our way of life. A democratic, socially open and fair society, which took 500 to 700 years to achieve. And could disappear in a few decades.

Exactly what impact has Islam had on your way of life? And how do you suppose the 5% of Muslims in the UK population would set about making democracy disappear, even if they wanted to? (which most don't - Anjem Choudary doesn't speak for any Muslim I know!).

Anonymous

Because if the extremists start a full blown war on behalf of islam and Muslims then what's to stop the rest of EU Muslims arming themselves to defend it?

slowmart

coriordan wrote:

Because if the extremists start a full blown war on behalf of islam and Muslims then what's to stop the rest of EU Muslims arming themselves to defend it?

I'm more worried that little pink aliens will invade earth….. :roll:

DeVlaeminck

RDW wrote:

It is a fear of Islam and how it is changing our way of life. A democratic, socially open and fair society, which took 500 to 700 years to achieve. And could disappear in a few decades.

Exactly what impact has Islam had on your way of life? And how do you suppose the 5% of Muslims in the UK population would set about making democracy disappear, even if they wanted to? (which most don't - Anjem Choudary doesn't speak for any Muslim I know!).

Yes 5% is a small number but if that grew to 15% or 20% I think you'd see Islam as a political force in the UK - it's at least realistic to imagine that - I am not saying that's a bad thing or a good thing that depends on your point of view but it's not an unrealistic scenario in the future even if not in the next couple of decades. Muslims tend to be grouped in certain urban areas so if they did support a Muslim political party or have significant lobby within an existing party their influence would be quite strong in our constituency based system.

Again I'm not saying that's a bad thing - in a way that is democracy in action.

morstar

So, we're drawing parallels between the Muslims and Nazis whilst doing exactly what the Nazis did and stirring up fear of an entire religious group.
I am not muslim and am not of any religion but this is politics of fear running riot. There is a problem with muslim extremism but 1.5 billion Muslims are not intent on ruling the world. The middle east is a disaster area and the west has contributed to the clusterf*ck. A dangerous minority are carrying out terrorist acts against the west. It does need creative measures to tackle but demonising the muslim world and stopping people following their faith and making them 3rd class, ostracized citizens which seems to be what is being alluded to does have quite a few Nazi parallels. I can't believe the irony of some of the arguments on here is completely lost.