terrorist attack in Paris

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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. Is it just me, or is this statement inconsistent?

Muslima--could you respond to the bolded?

Not Muslima, but it means Muslims shouldn't have to feel the need to say "I'm not like that, I don't believe that, Islam doesn't mean that," etc. every time there is an attack committed by Muslims. The vast majority of Muslims have nothing to do with these things and shouldn't feel the need to have to explain it.

True. The Highest Leaders of the Muslim faith need to make Public statements and engage these factions with a public battle of words and strict denunciation. Clearly undermining and verbally blowing up the extremists propaganda. If they don't, they are complicit.

They do make public statements. All the time.

And even if they didn't, they are not complicit. Have Christian leaders denounced that whack job in Texas who shot up Austin? Have white American leaders denounced the white supremacists who killed police in Las Vegas last year? Or the white supremacist who killed a black guy with a hatchet in Arizona recently? Almost decapitated the guy. Or the one who killed a black guy in Washington State before Christmas? If not, are they complicit in this violence too?

[Muslima]

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima 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.

And I agree with you that they shouldn't be killed for it. Btw what I posted was in the words of my friend, not mine. I personally think some of their cartoons were distasteful and many angered lots of folks. Should they be killed for it? Of course not!

While some of the cartoons may be viewed as distasteful, others who didn't view it in that light should be allowed their freedoms of preference. I personally feel strongly about that. Anything else is tantamount to book burning or prevention of anyone to reading a book or any kind.

I agree with you that people have the right to publish whatever they want, say whatever they want, ect but such rights should also come with good judgment. Just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you should, sometimes it just makes you look like an a**. If we want to live in a better world, we all have to make a conscious effort to be aware of each others sensibilities, beliefs, rights, wrongs, ect.

And if we want to live in a better world, we all have to make a conscious effort to call out a wrong when we see it....and call it out loudly and clearly. Regardless of anyone's feelings for Charlie Hebdo and whether they think it is filth or trash, the reason for the destruction of those lives should be condemned in the loudest and clearest voice without exception of whether one thinks it's trash or in bad taste.

Filth should not equal execution and should be condemned as such regardless whether it makes you like an ass or raises an eyebrow to those who disagree.

I don't think any level -headed Muslim is rejoicing at what happened today. Murdering someone is always wrong regardless of the motives, so don't distort my words. However, unless we start looking at the root causes, this will never get resolved

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima 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.

And I agree with you that they shouldn't be killed for it. Btw what I posted was in the words of my friend, not mine. I personally think some of their cartoons were distasteful and many angered lots of folks. Should they be killed for it? Of course not!

While some of the cartoons may be viewed as distasteful, others who didn't view it in that light should be allowed their freedoms of preference. I personally feel strongly about that. Anything else is tantamount to book burning or prevention of anyone to reading a book or any kind.

I agree with you that people have the right to publish whatever they want, say whatever they want, ect but such rights should also come with good judgment. Just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you should, sometimes it just makes you look like an a**. If we want to live in a better world, we all have to make a conscious effort to be aware of each others sensibilities, beliefs, rights, wrongs, ect.

See, you are in favor of censorship after all.
As Voltaire said: "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it."
This is, at its root, fundamentally incompatible with a religious point of view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I’m really sick of political correctness regarding the radical Islamists who are committing these terror attacks. Call them what they are - Islamic extremists who are terrorists.


Nobody argues with that definition. But, consistency would require identifying other terrorists by their religion as well.

This just seems silly to me. Radical Islam is their cause, so you call them radical Islamic terrorists. If animal rights terrorists attacked a laboratory, we'd call them animal rights terrorists, not Baptist animal rights terrorists or Mormon animal rights terrorists.

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima 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.

And I agree with you that they shouldn't be killed for it. Btw what I posted was in the words of my friend, not mine. I personally think some of their cartoons were distasteful and many angered lots of folks. Should they be killed for it? Of course not!

While some of the cartoons may be viewed as distasteful, others who didn't view it in that light should be allowed their freedoms of preference. I personally feel strongly about that. Anything else is tantamount to book burning or prevention of anyone to reading a book or any kind.

I agree with you that people have the right to publish whatever they want, say whatever they want, ect but such rights should also come with good judgment. Just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you should, sometimes it just makes you look like an a**. If we want to live in a better world, we all have to make a conscious effort to be aware of each others sensibilities, beliefs, rights, wrongs, ect.

And if we want to live in a better world, we all have to make a conscious effort to call out a wrong when we see it....and call it out loudly and clearly. Regardless of anyone's feelings for Charlie Hebdo and whether they think it is filth or trash, the reason for the destruction of those lives should be condemned in the loudest and clearest voice without exception of whether one thinks it's trash or in bad taste.

Filth should not equal execution and should be condemned as such regardless whether it makes you like an ass or raises an eyebrow to those who disagree.

I don't think any level -headed Muslim is rejoicing at what happened today. Murdering someone is always wrong regardless of the motives, so don't distort my words. However, unless we start looking at the root causes, this will never get resolved

And please don't distort my words. I never, ever said that any Muslim is rejoicing over today's carnage. I will not idly stand by and be accused of a mean spirited comment as you suggested because it didn't happen.

But I remain firm that every single person in the world should be outraged at the actions in Paris and any similar acts regardless who commits them whether they think it's filth or not. Otherwise, most of us would have thrown a brick or two.

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima 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.

And I agree with you that they shouldn't be killed for it. Btw what I posted was in the words of my friend, not mine. I personally think some of their cartoons were distasteful and many angered lots of folks. Should they be killed for it? Of course not!

While some of the cartoons may be viewed as distasteful, others who didn't view it in that light should be allowed their freedoms of preference. I personally feel strongly about that. Anything else is tantamount to book burning or prevention of anyone to reading a book or any kind.

I agree with you that people have the right to publish whatever they want, say whatever they want, ect but such rights should also come with good judgment. Just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you should, sometimes it just makes you look like an a**. If we want to live in a better world, we all have to make a conscious effort to be aware of each others sensibilities, beliefs, rights, wrongs, ect.

Muslima, while I mostly agreed with your posts so far, I strongly desagree with this. you seem to imply that the journalists should have somehow censored themselves, and did something wrong what they published what you defined before as "filth" (I strongly desagree with your judgemnt on CH's work also). but this is the heart of freedom of speech and of expression, which apparently is lost on some people. the coward murders of 12 people took place in France this morning because some terrorists decided to impose with violence they twisted values and points of view on others, not because the victims chose to write satirical cartoons and did not respect their murders sensibilities and beliefs. if we all want to live in a better world, we should most of all stop killing people because they say something we don't like.

[Anonymous]

http://i.imgur.com/yy9vg6P.jpg

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima 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.

And I agree with you that they shouldn't be killed for it. Btw what I posted was in the words of my friend, not mine. I personally think some of their cartoons were distasteful and many angered lots of folks. Should they be killed for it? Of course not!

While some of the cartoons may be viewed as distasteful, others who didn't view it in that light should be allowed their freedoms of preference. I personally feel strongly about that. Anything else is tantamount to book burning or prevention of anyone to reading a book or any kind.

I agree with you that people have the right to publish whatever they want, say whatever they want, ect but such rights should also come with good judgment. Just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you should, sometimes it just makes you look like an a**. If we want to live in a better world, we all have to make a conscious effort to be aware of each others sensibilities, beliefs, rights, wrongs, ect.

And if we want to live in a better world, we all have to make a conscious effort to call out a wrong when we see it....and call it out loudly and clearly. Regardless of anyone's feelings for Charlie Hebdo and whether they think it is filth or trash, the reason for the destruction of those lives should be condemned in the loudest and clearest voice without exception of whether one thinks it's trash or in bad taste.

Filth should not equal execution and should be condemned as such regardless whether it makes you like an ass or raises an eyebrow to those who disagree.

I don't think any level -headed Muslim is rejoicing at what happened today. Murdering someone is always wrong regardless of the motives, so don't distort my words. However, unless we start looking at the root causes, this will never get resolved

can you explain what you mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

http://i.imgur.com/yy9vg6P.jpg

This makes me very, very sad.

[Muslima]

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!

[Anonymous]

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!

Not the PP but how wonderful that you are allowed to express your experiences but the PP's experience have been met with your disdain.

Vive le freedom of speech!!

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I’m really sick of political correctness regarding the radical Islamists who are committing these terror attacks. Call them what they are - Islamic extremists who are terrorists.


Nobody argues with that definition. But, consistency would require identifying other terrorists by their religion as well.

This just seems silly to me. Radical Islam is their cause, so you call them radical Islamic terrorists. If animal rights terrorists attacked a laboratory, we'd call them animal rights terrorists, not Baptist animal rights terrorists or Mormon animal rights terrorists.

It may seem silly, but sadly the reality is that people who murder in the names of other religions are frequently not identified by their religion. For instance, a Christian who as a result of his religious beliefs kills an doctor who performs abortions, would likely be described as an anti-abortion activist rather than a Christian. If he is described as Christian, it would heavily caveated such a "member of the radical Christian fringe group...". But, more often than not, he will not be identified as a member of any group but simply as a lone wolf. I have no problem with these practices of identification, but it should be extended to Muslims.

Right now, unless something has recently changed, we don't know who the religion of the killers, though there is some evidence. That evidence could also be a false trail, though I think that is unlikely. But, even assuming the killers are Muslim, we really need to know more than that for the information to be useful. There are all kinds of Muslims. They aren't all the same. For instance, the killers appear to be men. But, all men are not being asked to denounce the attack and distance themselves. People are not talking about "Male Killers".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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. Is it just me, or is this statement inconsistent?

Muslima--could you respond to the bolded?

Not Muslima, but it means Muslims shouldn't have to feel the need to say "I'm not like that, I don't believe that, Islam doesn't mean that," etc. every time there is an attack committed by Muslims. The vast majority of Muslims have nothing to do with these things and shouldn't feel the need to have to explain it.

True. The Highest Leaders of the Muslim faith need to make Public statements and engage these factions with a public battle of words and strict denunciation. Clearly undermining and verbally blowing up the extremists propaganda. If they don't, they are complicit.

They do make public statements. All the time.

And even if they didn't, they are not complicit. Have Christian leaders denounced that whack job in Texas who shot up Austin? Have white American leaders denounced the white supremacists who killed police in Las Vegas last year? Or the white supremacist who killed a black guy with a hatchet in Arizona recently? Almost decapitated the guy. Or the one who killed a black guy in Washington State before Christmas? If not, are they complicit in this violence too?

White supremacists have not declared "Jihad" on western civilization and are miniscule in comparison to the size / scope/ organization and mass volume of violence . The radical Muslim threat is so large that millions innocent Muslims could easily be killed in collateral damage if these factions succeed in their goals. You would think self-preservation alone would dictate constant and definantive counter propaganda by the highest Muslim leaders.

[Anonymous]

I don't think any level -headed Muslim is rejoicing at what happened today. Murdering someone is always wrong regardless of the motives, so don't distort my words. However, unless we start looking at the root causes, this will never get resolved

I think it's in poor taste after an attack like this to blame the cartoonists/cartoons, if that's what you mean by "root causes." Remember, according to news reports, this magazine was an equal opportunity satirist. The root cause lies with the extremists who think this attack is praiseworthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think any level -headed Muslim is rejoicing at what happened today. Murdering someone is always wrong regardless of the motives, so don't distort my words. However, unless we start looking at the root causes, this will never get resolved

I think it's in poor taste after an attack like this to blame the cartoonists/cartoons, if that's what you mean by "root causes." Remember, according to news reports, this magazine was an equal opportunity satirist. The root cause lies with the extremists who think this attack is praiseworthy.

"Root causes" seems to refer to either the cartoons or possibly the existance of Israel on "Muslim land." Beyond those root causes, UBL demanded expulsion of all infidels from Muslim lands in order to protect the caliphate.