terrorist attack in Paris

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please please please, this has nothing to do with Islam. Please do not leap to any assumptions that this has to do with Islam.

The people doing the killing sure think it does.

[Anonymous]

Stop the insanity! Being murdered in come blood over cartoons? I knew the world was losing it when I saw a photograph of protestors in Pakistan a few years back beating up a Ronald McDonald statue. A statue. These are professional discontents who now stoop to murder to silence, while they want to be heard?????? I'm.done. I am going to every ayan hirsi Ali lecture, I'm subscribing to every paper that publishes these cartoons. I want freedom back.

[Anonymous]

There is a vigil tonight. If you can go, go!

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:There is a vigil tonight. If you can go, go!

Time and place?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please please please, this has nothing to do with Islam. Please do not leap to any assumptions that this has to do with Islam.

Religion is a tool that can be used how its followers choose to use it. So while this incident may not have anything to do with your interpretation of Islam, or the interpretation of most, it is absolutely a reflection of the perpetrators' view of Islam.

I mean think of how ironic it is. The terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo, because they depicted characterizations of the prophet Muhammad. Characterizations of prophet Muhammad are frowned upon, because it's mean to discourage idolatry (like how Muslims believe falsely led to idolatry of the prophet Jesus).

Yet... these terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo to "avenge" prophet Muhammad.

I don't consider myself Muslim, but I was raised in the faith. And absolutely disgusted with the idolatry of Muhammad. How people put Hadith & Sunna on the same degree as the Quran. That seemed so profoundly un-Islamic to me. Muhammad was a prophet, but a human being. A mortal. Homo sapien flesh. Too many Muslims place way, way, way too much emphasis on Muhammad, and don't realize just how much they worship Muhammad. They idolize him - they're doing what the whole non-depiction of Muhammad was meant to avoid. It's totally backfired.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please please please, this has nothing to do with Islam. Please do not leap to any assumptions that this has to do with Islam.

Religion is a tool that can be used how its followers choose to use it. So while this incident may not have anything to do with your interpretation of Islam, or the interpretation of most, it is absolutely a reflection of the perpetrators' view of Islam.

I mean think of how ironic it is. The terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo, because they depicted characterizations of the prophet Muhammad. Characterizations of prophet Muhammad are frowned upon, because it's mean to discourage idolatry (like how Muslims believe falsely led to idolatry of the prophet Jesus).

Yet... these terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo to "avenge" prophet Muhammad.

I don't consider myself Muslim, but I was raised in the faith. And absolutely disgusted with the idolatry of Muhammad. How people put Hadith & Sunna on the same degree as the Quran. That seemed so profoundly un-Islamic to me. Muhammad was a prophet, but a human being. A mortal. Homo sapien flesh. Too many Muslims place way, way, way too much emphasis on Muhammad, and don't realize just how much they worship Muhammad. They idolize him - they're doing what the whole non-depiction of Muhammad was meant to avoid. It's totally backfired.

I believe you responded to a troll, but your post is first rate. Quite the irony you point out.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a vigil tonight. If you can go, go!

Time and place?

7pm at, appropriately, the Newseum.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a vigil tonight. If you can go, go!

Time and place?

It started at 7pm in front of the Newseum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I just saw on Twitter that one of the policemen killed in Paris was a Muslim.

His name was Ahmed. He is the officer seen in the graphic video. He was 42 and had a one-year old girl.

Awful. Awful.

A relative back home in Paris had sent me an article that had that video in it, so I clicked on it not knowing what it would show. I was so disturbed by what I saw, it will haunt me just like the 9/11 videos or the documentary on the Kenyan mall shootings. The grief and anger in this world sometimes just are unimaginable. I am also so sad this video is in circulation, to think of his family.

Je suis Charlie.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please please please, this has nothing to do with Islam. Please do not leap to any assumptions that this has to do with Islam.

Religion is a tool that can be used how its followers choose to use it. So while this incident may not have anything to do with your interpretation of Islam, or the interpretation of most, it is absolutely a reflection of the perpetrators' view of Islam.

I mean think of how ironic it is. The terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo, because they depicted characterizations of the prophet Muhammad. Characterizations of prophet Muhammad are frowned upon, because it's mean to discourage idolatry (like how Muslims believe falsely led to idolatry of the prophet Jesus).

Yet... these terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo to "avenge" prophet Muhammad.

I don't consider myself Muslim, but I was raised in the faith. And absolutely disgusted with the idolatry of Muhammad. How people put Hadith & Sunna on the same degree as the Quran. That seemed so profoundly un-Islamic to me. Muhammad was a prophet, but a human being. A mortal. Homo sapien flesh. Too many Muslims place way, way, way too much emphasis on Muhammad, and don't realize just how much they worship Muhammad. They idolize him - they're doing what the whole non-depiction of Muhammad was meant to avoid. It's totally backfired.

I believe you responded to a troll, but your post is first rate. Quite the irony you point out.

My troll-dar is off, but thanks.

Truthfully, a big part of why I left the faith (eventually religion altogether), was frustration with the extreme obsession with Muhammad. It's totally out of control in much of the Muslim world. I remember watching a video about Muhammad's life as a kid in Sunday School (in the US), where Muhammad's face was basically a blurry blob. Even as a kid the taboo weirded me out and seemed so ironic. Why don't Muslims get upset over depictions of Jesus? Moses? Adam? Or any other prophet? Too many Muslims put Muhammad on a pedestal that's different from the rest. He may be the final prophet, but as a mortal human being, he doesn't need extra special treatment or to be handled with kid gloves.

I think the Charlie Hebdo cartoons are super distasteful and obnoxious, but obviously not worthy of violence. But I think practicing Muslims need to start depicting Muhammad. Nothing fancy, but Muhammad taking a walk. Playing with his kids. Eating breakfast. Drinking tea. Show images of Muhammad doing ordinary, mundane things, and break down the taboo. The (informal) "ban" on imagery of Muhammad is doing precisely the opposite of what it was intended to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please please please, this has nothing to do with Islam. Please do not leap to any assumptions that this has to do with Islam.

Religion is a tool that can be used how its followers choose to use it. So while this incident may not have anything to do with your interpretation of Islam, or the interpretation of most, it is absolutely a reflection of the perpetrators' view of Islam.

I mean think of how ironic it is. The terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo, because they depicted characterizations of the prophet Muhammad. Characterizations of prophet Muhammad are frowned upon, because it's mean to discourage idolatry (like how Muslims believe falsely led to idolatry of the prophet Jesus).

Yet... these terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo to "avenge" prophet Muhammad.

I don't consider myself Muslim, but I was raised in the faith. And absolutely disgusted with the idolatry of Muhammad. How people put Hadith & Sunna on the same degree as the Quran. That seemed so profoundly un-Islamic to me. Muhammad was a prophet, but a human being. A mortal. Homo sapien flesh. Too many Muslims place way, way, way too much emphasis on Muhammad, and don't realize just how much they worship Muhammad. They idolize him - they're doing what the whole non-depiction of Muhammad was meant to avoid. It's totally backfired.

I believe you responded to a troll, but your post is first rate. Quite the irony you point out.

My troll-dar is off, but thanks.

Truthfully, a big part of why I left the faith (eventually religion altogether), was frustration with the extreme obsession with Muhammad. It's totally out of control in much of the Muslim world. I remember watching a video about Muhammad's life as a kid in Sunday School (in the US), where Muhammad's face was basically a blurry blob. Even as a kid the taboo weirded me out and seemed so ironic. Why don't Muslims get upset over depictions of Jesus? Moses? Adam? Or any other prophet? Too many Muslims put Muhammad on a pedestal that's different from the rest. He may be the final prophet, but as a mortal human being, he doesn't need extra special treatment or to be handled with kid gloves.

I think the Charlie Hebdo cartoons are super distasteful and obnoxious, but obviously not worthy of violence. But I think practicing Muslims need to start depicting Muhammad. Nothing fancy, but Muhammad taking a walk. Playing with his kids. Eating breakfast. Drinking tea. Show images of Muhammad doing ordinary, mundane things, and break down the taboo. The (informal) "ban" on imagery of Muhammad is doing precisely the opposite of what it was intended to do.

I never thought of it in that way. Thanks for the enlightening perspective.

[Anonymous]

The 19 year old suspect surrendered himself to the police after hearing his name floating around, claiming he has nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_hizBb-z60&feature=youtu.be


I'm sure this is out of context, but guest on Alex Wagner equates this to Falwell's suit.

[Muslima]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please please please, this has nothing to do with Islam. Please do not leap to any assumptions that this has to do with Islam.

Religion is a tool that can be used how its followers choose to use it. So while this incident may not have anything to do with your interpretation of Islam, or the interpretation of most, it is absolutely a reflection of the perpetrators' view of Islam.

I mean think of how ironic it is. The terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo, because they depicted characterizations of the prophet Muhammad. Characterizations of prophet Muhammad are frowned upon, because it's mean to discourage idolatry (like how Muslims believe falsely led to idolatry of the prophet Jesus).

Yet... these terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo to "avenge" prophet Muhammad.

I don't consider myself Muslim, but I was raised in the faith. And absolutely disgusted with the idolatry of Muhammad. How people put Hadith & Sunna on the same degree as the Quran. That seemed so profoundly un-Islamic to me. Muhammad was a prophet, but a human being. A mortal. Homo sapien flesh. Too many Muslims place way, way, way too much emphasis on Muhammad, and don't realize just how much they worship Muhammad. They idolize him - they're doing what the whole non-depiction of Muhammad was meant to avoid. It's totally backfired.

I believe you responded to a troll, but your post is first rate. Quite the irony you point out.

My troll-dar is off, but thanks.

Truthfully, a big part of why I left the faith (eventually religion altogether), was frustration with the extreme obsession with Muhammad. It's totally out of control in much of the Muslim world. I remember watching a video about Muhammad's life as a kid in Sunday School (in the US), where Muhammad's face was basically a blurry blob. Even as a kid the taboo weirded me out and seemed so ironic. Why don't Muslims get upset over depictions of Jesus? Moses? Adam? Or any other prophet? Too many Muslims put Muhammad on a pedestal that's different from the rest. He may be the final prophet, but as a mortal human being, he doesn't need extra special treatment or to be handled with kid gloves.

I think the Charlie Hebdo cartoons are super distasteful and obnoxious, but obviously not worthy of violence. But I think practicing Muslims need to start depicting Muhammad. Nothing fancy, but Muhammad taking a walk. Playing with his kids. Eating breakfast. Drinking tea. Show images of Muhammad doing ordinary, mundane things, and break down the taboo. The (informal) "ban" on imagery of Muhammad is doing precisely the opposite of what it was intended to do.

You can leave Islam for whatever reason you seem fit, but to say that Muslims worship Prophet Muhammad saw is simply not true. Yes, there are some overzealous Muslims out there but you and I both know that worshipping people, prophets, saints, ect is contradictory and opposite to the teachings of the religion. Yes, Muslims do have a great love for the Prophet saw , yes some actually love him more that they love their parents, their children, their life, but I have never seen a Muslim worshipping the man. Nouman Ali Khan did a lecture about the other point you raised about why Muslims don't speak up when other prophets are made fun, because really depictions of all prophets are frown upon in Islam . He said :

"People of other religion ask- why are you Muslim so crazy? When people make fun of Jesus on Fox TV even though they claim to love Jesus, and they also show ‘Family Guy’ on Jesus; when they make fun of Jesus on TV, Christians don’t go crazy! People make fun of Moses all the time, Jews don’t go crazy! People make fun of Hindus and that certainly does happen, Hindus don’t go crazy! What is with you Muslims, can’t say anything to you people. Don’t you understand the concept of freedom of speech? Why do you people go crazy? And our usual response and you might think this was given being my response in this khutba is that- You don’t know what love is, you don’t know. You think you love Jesus, but we love Muhammad saw way way way more, and that’s why we go that crazy. But that is not my response today. My first response when that question is asked to me is that- how come I don’t get angry when Isaa (Alaihiwa sallam) is made fun of? How come I don’t get angry when Musa (Alaihiwa sallam) made fun of? Musa (Alaihi wa sallam) is The most mentioned messenger of Allah in The Quran. Muhammad is mentioned four times and Ahmad is mentioned once. That is the messenger of Allah sawmentioned by name in the Quran. Musa (Alaihissalam) is mentioned seventy plus times in the Quran. When Musa Alaihissalam is poked fun at, and he is poked fun at a lot, A Lot. When Jesus is made fun of, he is made fun of a lot. Where is my anger? ‘Oh that’s your problem.’ It’s their problem, that’s not my problem. So first of all, there is something even problematic about the way we emotionally respond. The things that we find offensive, there is something already problematic. But you could say- no no no, but Allah gave a special honor to Muhammad Rasulullah ?. I agree, yes, Allah did give the messenger ? a special honor. But it is the same Allah, who says-Glory to thy Lord, the Lord of Honour and Power! (He is free) from what they ascribe (to Him)! And Peace on the messengers! (sura as saffat : 180-181)"


But I do agree with you that killing cartoonists is just plain crazy. From what I am learning about the attackers, at least one of them has done time in the French prisons and was radicalized while there. He is described as a delinquent who was recruiting "jihadists" to go fight in Syria. I wonder, if these reports are true, how was he able to perpetrate this, especially with the weapons used given that it is not as easy to get these types of guns in France like it is in the US.

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:In the words of my friend, nothing can justify the disgraceful attacks against Charlie Hebdo. Murder is murder. It is not the Prophet (saw) who was avenged, it is our religion, our values and Islamic principles that have been betrayed and tainted . The kind of things ?CharlieHebdo? published were not decent. But whatever filth they published, they did NOT deserve to be killed for it.
Now even if the perpetrators of the attack claimed to be Muslim and supposedly shouted that they "avenged the Prophet", Muslims, either individually or collectively, are not responsible for what happened and should not have to apologize for being Muslim nor should they be or feel forced to distance themselves from the attacks. This is not some kind of declaration of war on Western civilization. Both the universal freedom of speech as well as Islam as a religion of compassion are under attack here. With the neo-fascist Front National growing in France, the Islamophobic Pegida next door, the far-right growing everywhere and a security state across the West waiting for any excuse to seize more civil liberties, nobody wins here by giving in to this rhetoric but those who want to sow hate on all sides.
Yes, we should be angry and sad about what happened, but we should not accept the invitation of the perpetrators of the attack to join them in their hatefulness. My deep sympathy and sincere condolences to the families of the victims.

There are many who would say Charlie Hebdo was not filth but satire. Just as many would say the Onion, which I enjoy, is satire.

However, everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion of what they view as filth. That's my and your right. How sad that someones definition of 'filth' took away the lives of husbands, wives, parents, sisters, brothers, and the right of free speech.

This. I'm of Middle Eastern origin and one of my grandmothers was a devout Muslim ( although fortunately the rest of the family freed itself from the yoke of religion altogether). I'm also a dual French-U.S. Citizen and I'm horrified and heartbroken about this massacre.
Charlie Hebdo is a satirical publication and it pokes fun at everyone, no matter how mightly or low, whether from the right or the left, and no matter their religion. It embodies the very principles at the heart of an open and democratic society, and this is nothing more than another attempt to destroy that freedom of speech.
So Muslima, don't come here spouting any of your propaganda about how Islam is a religion of compassion. All religions are selectively compassionate towards some tiny subset of humanity and ruthlessly violent towards the rest, and Islam isn't faring too well right now. Not since the Protestant reformation has a religion killed so many of its own, let alone others, in the name of God.
I was born in the Middle East but France gave me everything that has allowed me to get where I am today: a wonderful, secular, rigorous education (to a female, no less!), welcoming and loving friends without a trace of prejudice in their heart... I could go on but I think I'll start crying.
If you're worried about the Front National, good luck. That was one fine way of ingratiating Muslims to the hearts of the average French citizen.

You have got to be kidding me. Liberte, egalite, fraternite? Well my fellow french woman, France is one of the most intolerant countries in Europe, and you can look no further than the relationship between France and its colonies. Carrying a french passport won't make me say otherwise. Just 2 years ago, repirts still showed this, France is the most racist western European country , 1 in 3 French openly states they are racist. Lepen anyone? I have spent many years in France and half of my family still lives there. There are 3 things you do not want to be in France: Arab, Black or Muslim. Va demander os jeunes des cites relegues ds les HLM ce kils pensent de ton idee d'education a la francaise, la France ouverte qui t'a permi d'evoluer? Non mais tu blagues la ! Give me a break!

Et toi ma cherie, tu es une hypocrite, as is the rest of your family. If France is so bad, why don't you all go home to wherever you came from that was so great and renounce your citizenship? France was wonderful to me, and I suspect our backgrounds aren't so different (although you probably did not put your education to good use because you can't spell). One thing I can't stand is people who move to another country and then spend all their time sh******* on it. Ah yes, their culture is too permissive, their women are sluts, they have the gall of asking me to show my face for a picture ID...
If it's so bad to be Arab in France, why are there such thriving but moderate Arab communities there? Why do Saudi Arabian families own so many of the expensive houses in Paris, where they can come and party far from the stifling restrictions back home?
Hypocrits.

My dear, go and learn the definition of "hypocrite". First, I do not carry a French passport (by choice) though I can legally get one and I do not reside in France. My grandmother descends from a long line of French women, and my grandparents fought the war alongside their French brothers/sisters, so yeah liberte, egalite, fraternite? We fought for that. I do not identify as French though it's part of my heritage. Part of my family that lives there are French, not immigrants, so yeah, your comment about "go back where you're from" is laughable coming from a middle eastern man who immigrated to France as you described yourself. And , no I am sure that you and are not of the same background, nor of a close background. Now if your idea of French immigrants thriving is that Saudi immigrants own expensive houses in Paris, lol then this discussion is moot. You obviously don't understand the disparity, discrimination, racism that is blatant in France, so much so that there are many articles on the topic, google it. Self-imposed ignorance is not cute. Now as far as my spelling , you will have to bear with me, since I'm typing from my phone, and I don't think any of my forum comments would ever make it to a Law review paper, really, it is not that serious!

You keep skirting the points I'm making. To conclude:
Your ancestors fought for liberte, egalite, fraternite, but you also say that just because you can say something that others might find distasteful "filth" doesn't mean you should say it. Evidently, the idea of "liberte" somehow got completely lost somewhere in your journey. A free, open, democratic society does not kowtow to the kind of intimidation that religious fervor wishes to impose.

And regarding the fact that there are thriving Arab communities in France, it's absolutely relevant. You seem to be mistaking inherent racism with the kind of revulsion people often feel towards people who are poor, dependent and frequently unwilling to assimilate. Was I targeted with racist comments when I lived in France? Sure, once in a blue moon. I occasionally get them here too. So? The good things that came to me as a result of living in an open, democratic country far, far exceeded the disadvantages. Oh and by the way, I'm a woman, not a man.

With regards to the French being so racist, please...I grew up in contact with a lot of Middle Eastern Muslims. I witnessed firsthand the importance they attach to light skin color among their own. The nasty comments made about people behind their backs, even within families, to the effect that so and so is ugly because he/she is "dark". Anyone who's spent an iota of time in these countries can testify as to how socially stratified they are based on skin color, not to mention the kind of misery they inflict on Bangladeshi or Indian workers in their midst. You can pull this kind of white guilt crap with a lot of Western readers on DCUM, but not with me.
That said, it's true that today's massacre was a gift of astounding proportions to the Front National.
And as far as ignorance is concerned, yours is on display when you lecture about French colonialism, which for all its faults, was always inherently assimilationist. I still remember my third grade teacher almost 40 years ago telling us we were going to learn a poem "by a great French poet, Leopold Sedar Senghor." But I realize it's always easier to pose as a victim.

The bottom line though, is that your notion that you should refrain from saying offensive things is undemocratic and blames the victims. And it's a slippery slope from there to getting people killed. Others seem to agree:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/blame-for-charlie-hebdo-murders