BBC.com: Charlie Hebdo: Gun attack on French magazine kills 12

[tshile]

I agree wholeheartedly. You do have a disturbed mind.

 

Exhibit A. Exhibit B. Exhibit C . And note that these folks do have a biblical basis for their opinions. Mind you, the victims in the last two cases aren't people blaspheming Jeebus or doing anything "wrong", just existing is enough. Of course, these are fanatics, outliers. Not all Xtians are like them. But then wasn't that my point? 

 

The point isn't that you cannot find stuff in the bible about condemning, killing, god destroying people/places, etc of certain people because of their sexual preference, the god they pray to, etc.

 

The point is that you can find an entire section of the bible dedicated to Jesus' teachings, a lot of which had to do with how to treat your 'enemy'. Things like giving them the shirt off your back, food, water, loving them, not judging them, etc.

 

None of which can you find in the teachings of the Islamic prophet (at least that's my understanding, if I am wrong please correct me.)

 

I'm not exactly a big christian... if I'm forced to label myself as anything, it's agnostic. But i was raised in the christian religion and Jesus' teachings are 180 degrees from the ones that are used to encourage the types of attacks we saw in france this week. In fact, there's a whole lesson on dealing with such things in the story leading up to his crucifixion...

[autoidiodyssey]

Let me first say this is a really sad story. Hatred and violence are always troubling to me.

That said, I think it is odd the way this shooting is being characterized as "terrorism" (as in today's WaPo headline) whereas other crazed gunmen incidents are just called "mass shootings." It seems that only Muslims are called "terrorists," for some reason. It seems to me all mass murder should count as terrorism, regardless of the motive.

On top of the tragic loss of life, we also have here fuel for bigotry. The cycle of violence and hatred is just sad.

It may be a platitude, but I think it bears repeating: violence begets violence.

 

The Ft. Hood shooting, which was carried out by a Muslim, was called a mass shooting. The Army classified it as "workplace violence". John Allen Muhammad, one of the DC snipers, was a Muslim. I think that is generally considered a mass shooting and not a terrorist attack.

 

Terrorism is defined as the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. That pretty much fits what these guys did. This wasn't a random act like a crazy guy shooting up a movie theater. These guys targeted that magazine to send a message that people who publish cartoons of Muhammad will be killed. It is textbook terrorism. 

 

Abortion clinic bombings were mentioned earlier in this thread. I would say those fall under terrorism also. The bombers are attempting to "terrorize" the abortion providers into shutting down. Lanza is not called a terrorist because he didn't have a greater political goal he was trying to achieve. He was just a crazy person like most of the mass shooters.  

 

I think Muslims get the terrorist label more often because many of their radicalized groups are more active right now than other radical groups. When the IRA was setting off car bombs in London it was called terrorism. When members of Aum Shinrikyo released Sarin gas in the Tokyo subway it was considered terrorism. 

 

​I have no doubt that terrorist acts are being perpetrated by radicalized groups of most religions around the world. But we are not as likely to hear about things going on in Myanmar or Central Africa. We hear about attacks in the Western world or on Western interests. At this point in history most of those attacks are being carried out by radical Muslims. 

[s0crates]

The point isn't that you cannot find stuff in the bible about condemning, killing, god destroying people/places, etc of certain people because of their sexual preference, the god they pray to, etc.

The point is that you can find an entire section of the bible dedicated to Jesus' teachings, a lot of which had to do with how to treat your 'enemy'. Things like giving them the shirt off your back, food, water, loving them, not judging them, etc.

None of which can you find in the teachings of the Islamic prophet (at least that's my understanding, if I am wrong please correct me.)

I'm not exactly a big christian... if I'm forced to label myself as anything, it's agnostic. But i was raised in the christian religion and Jesus' teachings are 180 degrees from the ones that are used to encourage the types of attacks we saw in france this week. In fact, there's a whole lesson on dealing with such things in the story leading up to his crucifixion...

Not exactly.

1. Jesus is frequently quoted in the Koran.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam

2. Scholars consider Islam a religion that teaches peace and justice.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0925_TVkoran.html

[twa]

I agree wholeheartedly. You do have a disturbed mind.

 

That is pretty well established, ya should try living with it 

[visionary]

The point isn't that you cannot find stuff in the bible about condemning, killing, god destroying people/places, etc of certain people because of their sexual preference, the god they pray to, etc.

The point is that you can find an entire section of the bible dedicated to Jesus' teachings, a lot of which had to do with how to treat your 'enemy'. Things like giving them the shirt off your back, food, water, loving them, not judging them, etc.

None of which can you find in the teachings of the Islamic prophet (at least that's my understanding, if I am wrong please correct

Pretty sure there is at least some since I'm constantly seeing Muslims bringing some if it up on Twitter to condemn this kind of attack every time one happens.

[JoeWolf990]

The point isn't that you cannot find stuff in the bible about condemning, killing, god destroying people/places, etc of certain people because of their sexual preference, the god they pray to, etc.

 

The point is that you can find an entire section of the bible dedicated to Jesus' teachings, a lot of which had to do with how to treat your 'enemy'. Things like giving them the shirt off your back, food, water, loving them, not judging them, etc.

 

None of which can you find in the teachings of the Islamic prophet (at least that's my understanding, if I am wrong please correct me.)

 

I'm not exactly a big christian... if I'm forced to label myself as anything, it's agnostic. But i was raised in the christian religion and Jesus' teachings are 180 degrees from the ones that are used to encourage the types of attacks we saw in france this week. In fact, there's a whole lesson on dealing with such things in the story leading up to his crucifixion...

you should read more about Islamic teachings and how it relates to Christianity. You clearly do not have much of a clue. (not even your fault, you live in Western society which has a fear of Islam)

[tshile]

Not exactly.

1. Jesus is frequently quoted in the Koran.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam

2. Scholars consider Islam a religion that teaches peace and justice.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0925_TVkoran.html

 

I will need to read these after work. I'm admittedly quite ignorant of Islam and have to parse out what I read/hear everywhere else. That includes friends I have that are practicing muslims, not just tv news .

 

I've never read the Koran...

you should read more about Islamic teachings and how it relates to Christianity. You clearly do not have much of a clue. (not even your fault, you live in Western society which has a fear of Islam)

 

Does the prophet mohamad not speak to his people about acting violently to those that do things like.... make caricatures of him?

 

i have no issue with admitting my ignorance on the matter, but i have always been under the impression that these things come directly from mohamad.

[visionary]

http://m.thenational.ae/opinion/comment/paris-killings-require-more-than-mere-condemnation

Good article

[mcsluggo]

you'd be taken more seriously without the 'jeebus' thing, but, whatever.

 

....

 

agreed.  I'm not sure how that is particularly different from insisting on calling our president Hussein, or dropping an occasional "do you hear me, boy?" in a conversation between grownups.

[grego]

Not exactly.

1. Jesus is frequently quoted in the Koran.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam

2. Scholars consider Islam a religion that teaches peace and justice.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0925_TVkoran.html

 

real quick- and this isnt mean to be pro one religion and anti- another-- the jesus as described in the quran is a bit different from the one described by the bible (hes not God, for one). much like the jesus or god the LDS church believe in, for example, have very different attributes, but are said to be the same (by their followers, but not by christians). 

 

where there are discrepancies with regards to religious figures (and god himself) when it comes to the LDS or islam, the book of mormon and quran, respectively, take precedence according to their followers.

 

scholars are all over the place with their opinions. its fair to say there is much about peace in the quran as well as verses about war and killing, much like the old testament. 

[visionary]

Christianity has areas that could be confusing or misused for extremist purposes too, even excluding the earlier part of the bible, just off the top of my head we have Jesus and the moneylenders, and some of Paul's teachings which could be viewed by some as a more recent/updated and somewhat stricter view on life.  

[grego]

Christianity has areas that could be confusing or misused for extremist purposes too, even excluding the earlier part of the bible, just off the top of my head we have Jesus and the moneylenders, and some of Paul's teachings which could be viewed by some as a more recent/updated and somewhat stricter view on life.

The OT, for sure.

The NT is less controversial, imo, yet has spawned some of the nuttier purported followers.

Westboro Baptist and the KKK are two that come to mind.

Imagine a group with Jews near the top of their list of hated people, yet the beloved ancient leader of said group is...a Jew.

You can't make that up.

[Wildbunny]

Getting a bit sick about hearing them being called Muslims...

 

I know quite a few, I use to work with many. They're not like that.

 

Terrorists? Sure

Muslims? No, they're just assholes.

 

That should be a good start to name them what they really like.

I don't care what they claim or how they want to be seen. That's what they are.

[btfoom]

I am glad you can speak for the culture of a billion plus people that spread out across the world.

A more realistic spectrum (without your arbitrary points to define it) would go more like

Super devout to practically non-observant some of whom will use violence to achieve their goals (just like with any other group on earth). And within each of those places on the spectrum are a dozen or so other differences, a salafi is very different from a Sufi who is very different from a twelver. To speak about a culture so casually without looking at all the random people and groups you lump into it is really counterproductive.

The fact is that a very small group of people committed an atrocious act but that act and the way a religion or an ideology manifests itself never happens in a vacuum and there are always outside factors and pressures that shape its development. That is why the Muslim population in Indonesia is very different from the one in Pakistan which is different from the one in Chile. 

To simply ascribe a billion people from dozens of different sects and interpretations of Islam under one umbrella of culture is reductivist and just not useful at all because there is such a diversity of opinions and beliefs just like there is in any group.

 

 

You are wrong and simply putting your belief/spin on this issue.

 

When terror attacks happen, there are NO Muslim leaders coming out and attacking it.  There are no Muslim leaders condemning it.  In fact, there are Muslim leaders who say that killing in the name of defending Allah and Islam is the RIGHT thing to do.

 

Read the article from today in the USA Today (from a Muslim Cleric):  http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/01/07/islam-allah-muslims-shariah-anjem-choudary-editorials-debates/21417461/

 

This is the type of hate and sentiment that is the core of this religion.

[SkinsHokieFan]

You are wrong and simply putting your belief/spin on this issue.

 

When terror attacks happen, there are NO Muslim leaders coming out and attacking it.  There are no Muslim leaders condemning it.  In fact, there are Muslim leaders who say that killing in the name of defending Allah and Islam is the RIGHT thing to do.

 

Read the article from today in the USA Today (from a Muslim Cleric):  http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/01/07/islam-allah-muslims-shariah-anjem-choudary-editorials-debates/21417461/

 

This is the type of hate and sentiment that is the core of this religion.

 

wtf?

 

Ah yes, Anjem Chaudry, Fox News' favorite Muslim "leader" 

 

The only reason he is a "leader" is because Fox News loves him and his ridiculous interviews. It is really like saying that David Duke is the leader of white people

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/muslim-leaders-condemn-attack-warn-on-anti-islamic-sentiment-in-europe-1420654885

 

 

Muslim Leaders Condemn Attack, Warn on Anti-Islamic Sentiment in Europe

 

Muslim leaders strongly condemned the deadly attack on offices of a French satirical magazine but at the same time, some cautioned that the rise of anti-Islamic sentiment in Europe risked strengthening support for jihadists across the continent.

In the capitals of Muslim nations, government ministers took to the airwaves to voice sympathy and solidarity with France after gunmen killed 12 people in the assault on the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo, a magazine targeted in the past for cartoons that some Muslims found offensive

In Europe and the U.S., Muslim leaders called for tolerance while some mosques stepped up security in case of reprisal attacks. On social media sites Twitter and Facebook, Islamic organizations denounced the violence, with many using the top-trending #CharlieHebdo to express solidarity.

In Cairo, Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry said Egypt “stands in France’s corner” in a fight against terrorism that threatens global security and stability. That message was echoed by the governments of Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and in Iraq, where authorities are waging war against extremist group Islamic State with expanding air and ground support from a U.S.-led international coalition.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said fighting terrorism was an “absolute must” but also warned that anti-Islamic sentiment in Europe was fueling terrorism.

 

 

 

Come on man, that took a 3 second google search to find thousands of Muslim leaders condemning the attack. 

 

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/01/07/what-fox-wont-show-you-muslim-leaders-are-conde/202049

 

French Muslim Council: Attack Is An "Extremely Grave Barbaric Action." In a statement, the French Muslim Council condemned the Paris attack as an "extremely grave barbaric action," and called it "an attack against democracy and the freedom of the press." [AlJazeera.com, 1/7/15]

Muslim Council Of Britain Condemns Attack: "Nothing Justifies The Taking Of Life." The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying "The Muslim Council of Britain condemns this attack. Whomever the attackers are, and whatever the cause may be, nothing justifies the taking of life." [Muslim Council of Britain, 1/7/15]

Council On American-Islamic Relations: "We Strongly Condemn This Brutal And Cowardly Attack." CAIR strongly condemned the attack, calling it "brutal and cowardly," and used the opportunity to reiterate the organization's "repudiation of any such assault on freedom of speech, even speech that mocks faiths and religious figures":

 

Arab League "Strongly Condemns The Terrorist Attack On Charlie Hebdo Newspaper In Paris." The Arab League said in a statement that "Arab League chief Nabil al-Arabi strongly condemns the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo newspaper in Paris." [Al Arabiya News, 1/7/15]

Al-Azhar: "Islam Denounces Any Violence." According to Al Arabiya News, "Al-Azhar, a thousand-year-old seat of religious learning respected by Muslims around the world, referred to the attack as a criminal act, saying that 'Islam denounces any violence.'" [Al Arabiya News, 1/7/15]

 

[Predicto]

You are wrong and simply putting your belief/spin on this issue.

 

When terror attacks happen, there are NO Muslim leaders coming out and attacking it.  There are no Muslim leaders condemning it.  In fact, there are Muslim leaders who say that killing in the name of defending Allah and Islam is the RIGHT thing to do.

 

Read the article from today in the USA Today (from a Muslim Cleric):  http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/01/07/islam-allah-muslims-shariah-anjem-choudary-editorials-debates/21417461/

 

This is the type of hate and sentiment that is the core of this religion.

 

 

You wallow in your ignorance.   It's astounding.

[SkinsHokieFan]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/07/muslims-respond-charlie-hebdo_n_6429710.html

 

 

Muslims Around The World Condemn Charlie Hebdo Attack

 

Muslims in France and around the world banded together on Wednesday to strongly condemn the deadliest terror attack the country has seen in the past two decades.

Three masked gunmen stormed the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical magazine that has become notorious for its caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. One of the men reportedly shouted “Allahu akbar” as they unleashed a barrage of bullets that left at least twelve dead.

Muslim leaders and activists immediately denounced the terrorists actions, reiterating the verse in the Quran that tells Muslims when one kills just one innocent person, it is as if he has killed all of humanity.

The Grand Mosque of Paris, one of the largest in France, issued a statement on its website shortly after the attacks, saying its community was "shocked" and "horrified" by the violence.

 

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

Kind of embarrased I have to post this. Again a 3 second google search

 

http://www.salon.com/2011/03/02/anjem_choudary_america/

 

Fox’s favorite Muslim radical H

ow the media is enabling a buffoonish -- and notoriously press-hungry -- extremist

 

 

Whether the protest actually goes forward — there’s a real chance it won’t, if Choudary’s past stunts are any guide — doesn’t really matter. Choudary, who is known for applauding terrorism and calling for stonings of gay people and the overthrow of democratic governments, has already logged several appearances on Fox and CNN, generated a bunch of articles in the right-wing press, and even prompted a member of Congress to demand that he be banned from the country. All that in the last month.

Choudary is a London-based preacher who has over the past decade become the face of radical Islam in the British press — especially in the tabloids, and even more especially the right-wing papers owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. — despite having no religious credentials and virtually no public support. In fact, according to those who have tracked his career in Britain, Choudary is wholly a press creation.

“He’s a media whore,” says Mehdi Hasan, a senior editor at the New Statesman who has covered Choudary. “There are real Islamist groups that can get crowds together but his is not one of them. He doesn’t have the numbers to make good on his claims. What he does have is a media that’s very happy to play the game with him.”

Now, Choudary, 43, is using the same formula — making deliberately offensive statements and trumpeting plans for provocative demonstrations — in the United States, where the media has proved all too willing to accommodate him. He can be understood as the Muslim analogue of Terry Jones, the obscure Florida preacher who created an international controversy last year with plans for a “Burn the Quran Day.” He is a radical with minuscule public support, but one who can, given enough free airtime, do real-world damage.

Last month on Fox Sean Hannity had a sparring match with the preacher that ended with Hannity calling him “one sick, miserable, evil SOB.” (It’s worth noting that Fox has the same parent company, News Corp., as some of the U.K. tabloids that obsessively cover Choudary.) Here’s a taste of the exchange:

On Thursday, the radical Muslim and veteran provocateur Anjem Choudary plans to hold a demonstration in front of the White House calling for an extreme form of sharia to reign in America.

 

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

I am going to come off as an insensitive asshole, but whatever, we are all friends here

 

This was a horrible human tragedy and I am one who is a free speech absolutist, which is why I generally laugh at cartoons meant to depict the Prophet. I am more insulted by the sensitivity of Muslims rather then these cartoons, considering our "victory" is supposed to occur in the after life, not here on Earth. But I digress

 

However when something like 1,462 civilians in Gaza were killed this past summer by Israel, and our drone war has killed as of January 2014 over 2,400 people (most of whom were civilians) I have trouble getting worked up over 12 dead in a mass shooting in Paris. 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/the-un-says-7-in-10-palestinians-killed-in-gaza-were-civilians-israel-disagrees/2014/08/29/44edc598-2faa-11e4-9b98-848790384093_story.html

 

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/sep/11/henry-kissinger/kissinger-drones-have-killed-more-civilians-bombin/

 

http://www.wired.com/2013/02/graham-drones/

 

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/22/leaked_report_shows_high_civilian_death_toll_from_cia_drone_strikes/

[s0crates]

You wallow in your ignorance. It's astounding.

Nobody ever said Fixed news made people more knowledgeable.

[grego]

You are wrong and simply putting your belief/spin on this issue.

When terror attacks happen, there are NO Muslim leaders coming out and attacking it. There are no Muslim leaders condemning it. In fact, there are Muslim leaders who say that killing in the name of defending Allah and Islam is the RIGHT thing to do.

Read the article from today in the USA Today (from a Muslim Cleric): http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/01/07/islam-allah-muslims-shariah-anjem-choudary-editorials-debates/21417461/

This is the type of hate and sentiment that is the core of this religion.

Bt, there are many kinds of Muslims all over the world. The vast majority dont want to kill you.

I've heard that self proclaimed cleric, and he's a loon, with virtually no support among Muslims. Hannity puts him on for ratings.

You can be critical of specific groups or beliefs or people, but you shouldn't generalize.

[Predicto]

He isn't even a cleric.

 

In January 2010, Guardian contributor Mehdi Hasan wrote: "Is Choudary an Islamic scholar whose views merit attention or consideration? No. Has he studied under leading Islamic scholars? Nope. Does he have any Islamic qualifications or credentials? None whatsoever. So what gives him the right to pontificate on Islam, British Muslims or 'the hellfire'? Or proclaim himself a 'sharia judge'?", 

 

Choudary's a bullcrap artist, a media whore, and he only gets his publicity because the right wing media wants to keep ignoramuses like btfoom riled up all the time.   And of course it works.

[The Evil Genius]

The worst part is that people buy it hook line and sinker. This thread is evidence of it..especially amongst some posters who should know a hell of a lot better.

[PCS]

Funny thing is that it's real easy to see how wrong Faux News and other media sites and such are with these types of assertions by simply doing a few minutes research. You know. Independent thinking stuff. 

[RiggosMohawk]

I am amazed, stunned, and somewhat pleased at the lack of real updates on the situation. Possibly a combination of on foreign soil, or much tighter security on the search/investigation, or both. The security sounds very warranted given the reported details on the skills of the guys on the run.