terrorist attack in Paris

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:It is important to understand the meaning of words and be a critical listener. Explaining behavior is different from justifying it. If someone intentionally spills coffee on me and I kill them in response, the explanation for what I did was that I was defying their actions, and wanted to show them I had a bigger ego than they did and will not allow anyone to mistreat me . But that, of course, isn't a justification for what I did, because, even though what they did was wrong, my reaction to it is out of proportion.

Now back to the Paris attack, it is disingenuous to state that I put all the blame on the French government and policies. That would be ridiculous, you can go back to my posts and clearly see how I not only blamed the attackers but stated that we have a lot of young Muslims who are so angry and full of hate that they have lost their sense of humanity. I will focus on the Muslim explanation by popular demand

-In the Muslim community, we have uneducated, self-taught followers who believe they are qualified to give religious verdicts and that they can make someone else's life permissible, without ever actually having studied with a single scholar. Googling fatwas and quoting random incidents from the Seerah is enough these days to become a faqih.

-The terms jihad (struggle) and Shaheed ( martyr) have been hijacked by extremist movements who might be motivated by legitimate concerns, but express that motivation in un-Islamic manners, and cause destruction & bloodshed in the name of religion whilst overlooking their own responsibilities towards their communities.

-Young overzealous youth, angered by the transgressions of Western powers, are often swayed by fancy rhetoric and enticing slogans into entering a military conflict that eventually ends up harming the very people they claim to protect

-The Muslim world lacks strong leaders and strong institutions. They are mostly led by dictators who oppress their own people and are in bed with the western world.

- You have a country like Saudi Arabia that is exporting more extremism than oil. Political identity around grievances are then used and exploited in regions with huge crisis of identity problems.

- Lots of extremists that inspire people through the web, we need to counter that narrative

- Attacks like the ones in Paris will provoke the rise of nationalist policies and parties in the West, and this is what extremists want, so they can draw a further wedge and recruit more people. Their main goal is to divide communities so they can polarize and radicalize.

For anyone interested, I highly recommend this talk by Dr.Yasir Qadhi about the causes and roots of Muslim Fundamentalism .In this interview, he gets into the mindset of radical "Islamic" movements and unveils the psychological framework that leads to terrorism. He academically analyses the three primary combinations that must exist before radicalism is resorted to and talks about how to fight these ideologies. [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gGYVsbRvDQ [/youtube]

Thanks for that. We're just leaving for lunch with the i laws or I'd say more. But thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:The Koran says that one cannot draw Muhammad. This prohibition applies to Muslims, no? Why would others have to fulfill the obligation of someone else's religion?

The Qur'an doesn't say such a thing....

It's prohibited in all of Islam? Who did the prohibiting, if it's not the Quran? Certainly it was prohibited by someone by the time Muslims were hiding the mosaics in Hagia Sophia around 1500. Yet, if it's not in the Quran, and you said earlier that only God truly knows what's in the Quran anyway, and you also said there's no single Islam... then what is the basis for the claim about an ongoing prohibition about images including cartoons? Is there room here to start even a limited discussion about Islam in the 21st century?

I thought that Divine Messengers since the time of Moses forbid the worship of images and to make any prophet have an image to worship would be a problem but, maybe someone else who unserstands Islam better would know.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:One can draw Muhammed and one should have at it. Those that don't want to gaze upon such images should not purchase the magazines, art etc. The Koran is an extremely confusing book; many of the rules of Islam come from the hadith which record Muhammed's life--and serve as a model. Since he lived in practically a stone age culture (his big struggle was against people who literally worshipped rock idols) a lot of his life is grounded in that time period. Marrying many wives made sense back then--there were a lot of widows who needed protection. Other rules on women are inconsistent. He supposedly consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was 10 and he 53 (gross). She is also a revered figure who recorded many hadith and rode into battle on camel. People who literally wish to follow the hadith are people who live in the stone age. Much like Christianity (Im Christian) has been open to feminist critique for years, Islam needs some air breathed into it. It's pretty darned dusty overall. Sorry--but feminist Muslims are not by and large embraced, women do live very submissively in many parts of the Muslim world (genital mutilation anyone?), there are horrible laws and practices on the books with Sharia--and it goes back to a stone age that persists unexamined by the large majority of practicioners.

Just one note, female genital mutilation is not a Muslim practice, but a cultural tradition mostly confined to parts of Africa and small areas of the Arab world. In those areas are heavily Muslims but the practice also exists among non-Muslims.

[Muslima]

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:It is important to understand the meaning of words and be a critical listener. Explaining behavior is different from justifying it. If someone intentionally spills coffee on me and I kill them in response, the explanation for what I did was that I was defying their actions, and wanted to show them I had a bigger ego than they did and will not allow anyone to mistreat me . But that, of course, isn't a justification for what I did, because, even though what they did was wrong, my reaction to it is out of proportion.

Now back to the Paris attack, it is disingenuous to state that I put all the blame on the French government and policies. That would be ridiculous, you can go back to my posts and clearly see how I not only blamed the attackers but stated that we have a lot of young Muslims who are so angry and full of hate that they have lost their sense of humanity. I will focus on the Muslim explanation by popular demand

-In the Muslim community, we have uneducated, self-taught followers who believe they are qualified to give religious verdicts and that they can make someone else's life permissible, without ever actually having studied with a single scholar. Googling fatwas and quoting random incidents from the Seerah is enough these days to become a faqih.

-The terms jihad (struggle) and Shaheed ( martyr) have been hijacked by extremist movements who might be motivated by legitimate concerns, but express that motivation in un-Islamic manners, and cause destruction & bloodshed in the name of religion whilst overlooking their own responsibilities towards their communities.

-Young overzealous youth, angered by the transgressions of Western powers, are often swayed by fancy rhetoric and enticing slogans into entering a military conflict that eventually ends up harming the very people they claim to protect

-The Muslim world lacks strong leaders and strong institutions. They are mostly led by dictators who oppress their own people and are in bed with the western world.

- You have a country like Saudi Arabia that is exporting more extremism than oil. Political identity around grievances are then used and exploited in regions with huge crisis of identity problems.

- Lots of extremists that inspire people through the web, we need to counter that narrative

- Attacks like the ones in Paris will provoke the rise of nationalist policies and parties in the West, and this is what extremists want, so they can draw a further wedge and recruit more people. Their main goal is to divide communities so they can polarize and radicalize.

For anyone interested, I highly recommend this talk by Dr.Yasir Qadhi about the causes and roots of Muslim Fundamentalism .In this interview, he gets into the mindset of radical "Islamic" movements and unveils the psychological framework that leads to terrorism. He academically analyses the three primary combinations that must exist before radicalism is resorted to and talks about how to fight these ideologies. [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gGYVsbRvDQ [/youtube]

Thanks for that. We're just leaving for lunch with the i laws or I'd say more. But thanks.

You are quite welcome PP

[Muslima]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:The Koran says that one cannot draw Muhammad. This prohibition applies to Muslims, no? Why would others have to fulfill the obligation of someone else's religion?

The Qur'an doesn't say such a thing....

It's prohibited in all of Islam? Who did the prohibiting, if it's not the Quran? Certainly it was prohibited by someone by the time Muslims were hiding the mosaics in Hagia Sophia around 1500. Yet, if it's not in the Quran, and you said earlier that only God truly knows what's in the Quran anyway, and you also said there's no single Islam... then what is the basis for the claim about an ongoing prohibition about images including cartoons? Is there room here to start even a limited discussion about Islam in the 21st century?

I thought that Divine Messengers since the time of Moses forbid the worship of images and to make any prophet have an image to worship would be a problem but, maybe someone else who unserstands Islam better would know.

You are correct

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Frances best response would be to.embrace its moderate Muslim.and Jewish populations. Both seem under attack by this human garbage, along with the rest of the people / ideals of France.

I agree with this 100%.

[Anonymous]

The female suspect is in Syria. She left from Madrid to Turkey on January 2 and crossed into the Syrian border on January 8.

[Anonymous]

News alert:

French police have been told to erase their social media and brace for attacks as intelligence reports that sleeper cells have been activated.

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:The Koran says that one cannot draw Muhammad. This prohibition applies to Muslims, no? Why would others have to fulfill the obligation of someone else's religion?

The Qur'an doesn't say such a thing....

It's prohibited in all of Islam? Who did the prohibiting, if it's not the Quran? Certainly it was prohibited by someone by the time Muslims were hiding the mosaics in Hagia Sophia around 1500. Yet, if it's not in the Quran, and you said earlier that only God truly knows what's in the Quran anyway, and you also said there's no single Islam... then what is the basis for the claim about an ongoing prohibition about images including cartoons? Is there room here to start even a limited discussion about Islam in the 21st century?

I thought that Divine Messengers since the time of Moses forbid the worship of images and to make any prophet have an image to worship would be a problem but, maybe someone else who unserstands Islam better would know.

You are correct

But a prohibition against worshipping images is different from a prohibition against drawing or making images.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK. Let's summarize to make it clear that French bigotry belongs in the list of explanations, but is not the entire list.

1. French bigotry and racism.
2. Lack of constructive Muslim engagement with the political system to remedy said bigotry and racism.
3. Twisted and murderous version of Islam.
4. High unemployment among all French youth, but especially among Muslims = boredom and poverty
5. Lack of attractive alternatives to radical Islam.
6. Lack of broad Muslim dialogue about things like images, apostasy, and other things that contributed to CH.. This is the Reformation issue and yes, I'm going there. Sure, plenty of Muslims have said in recent days that it's not OK to kill for these things. But that's not the same thing as asking whether the ban on images is really Islam, or it they has a place in the 21st century. The conversation is taking place seems confined to theologians with years of schooling and fluent Arabic, because these are traditionally the men who decide such theological issues, but these guys by the nature of their training and jobs are very conservative.
6. Muslim victimhood mentality that looks to others to change themselves. Hello, Muslima! You're a broken record of "Islam is peaceful, these guys weren't real Muslims, but anyway they were provoked by bigotry." I haven't seen a single call from Muslima, not one single call from you, for Muslims themselves to do anything themselves. Like, for example, step up efforts to stop the radicalization of Muslim youth, or have a larger dialogue about apostasy and other rules that were of concern in the CH case, or for massive Muslim passive resistence efforts such as marches against bigotry and racism. I can't speak for others, but I suspect this is why others are so frustrated with you.

Those of you with short memories and little information who keep harping on this notion of French bigotry and racism should be reminded of the 2002 French Presidential election, in which the idiot socialist candidate managed to not even make it to the second round, prompting a runoff between the extreme right wing National Front who had received 15% of the vote in the first round and the Conservative candidate Chirac, who had been accused of corruption. Faced with the choice of the right wing extremist and the crook, voters turned out in record numbers to vote for the crook. We didn't see a lot of Republicans here deserting en masse for the Democratic Party when the Tea Party ruled the show. But yeah, the French are inherently racist. Mind you, I'd be surprised if the National Front doesn't win this time around.

The choice between Chirac, who was under suspicion for actions carried out whilst he was mayor of Paris (see corruption scandals in the Paris region) but benefited from Presidential immunity as long as he stayed president, and Le Pen, a nationalist often accused of racism and antisemitism, was one that many found tough. Some people suggested going to vote with a clothes peg on their noses to express disgust when voting for Chirac, but this may have been illegal, because it is prohibited to advertise one's vote inside the voting precinct. In the days before the second ballot, a memorable poster was put up of Chirac with the slogan "Vote for the Crook, not the Fascist".[4] Chirac defeated Le Pen by a landslide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_presidential_election,_2002

Since we are so much more open-minded, why don't we take in all of Europe's oppressed Muslim minority? The state of the economy here is improving by the day--they'll do just great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:News alert:

French police have been told to erase their social media and brace for attacks as intelligence reports that sleeper cells have been activated.

What's the source? Libe, le monde, le Figaro?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:News alert:

French police have been told to erase their social media and brace for attacks as intelligence reports that sleeper cells have been activated.

What's the source? Libe, le monde, le Figaro?

It's on CNN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:News alert:

French police have been told to erase their social media and brace for attacks as intelligence reports that sleeper cells have been activated.

What's the source? Libe, le monde, le Figaro?

It's on CNN.

Weird that it isn't in any French newspapers. I wonder if CNN is being slightly alarmist.

[Anonymous]

"We didn't see a lot of Republicans here deserting en masse for the Democratic Party when the Tea Party ruled the show. But yeah, the French are inherently racist. Mind you, I'd be surprised if the National Front doesn't win this time around. "

There is a misconception that UMP=Rep, PS=Dem, and FN=tea party. The FN, particularly until a few years ago, was clearly neo-fascist and much more xenophobic than the tea party, and it is more populist and much less libertarian, particularly in economic issues, than the tea party. Don't have the time right now to give details.

[Anonymous]

^^a somewhat more apt comparison would be a situation where there is a runoff system in the US (which isn't the case), and the candidates are Rudy Giuliani and Michelle Bachmann. What do you think democrats would do?