Female Police officer stabbed to death in France

Cordell

It's not the past decade, it started in the 70s with the islamic revolutions. The very fact that there are <religion name> revolutions creating <religion name> states should be a hint of how dangerous this really is but I guess if you need some stranger on a forum to tell you that then it's really pointless anyway.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Cordell wrote: »

Read my post carefully, I never said that. What I said is that this religion is inherently radical, so it makes it way more easier to convince their adepts to take that extra step.

Your first post never specificed a religion. It attmpeted to make a conenction between historical religious documents and the modern day acts of of its followers.

I'm not arguing Bible/Koran posts because it's a complete waste of time. If your have to drag up religious documents in order to make a point, you're generalising which I personally find ignorant (as I portrayed by telling you that you can dop it with any religion) and that you can do with someone else
.

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So by your standards we can blame all Christians for mass shootings in Amerca? I mean it's a fact that the majority of school shootings over the decades have been done by young white Christian males therefore all white Christian males are to blame for these, have you ever come out and apologised for these sickening acts? If not then that must mean you support them.

Were these young Christian males shouting about their religion (or basing their justifications due to their religious belief) when they engaged in the shootings? The motivation for the shootings weren't religious. There wasn't a core belief system to unify all the Christians as being even remotely responsible. And I think you'll find that most Christian groups condemned these attacks in America.

Whereas in the vast majority of attacks performed by Muslims, their religion is a core factor..

Come on. I get the need to draw comparisons.. but let's use comparisons that are actually relevant/similar.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Yes there has been a documented increase in such attacks over the past decade or more.

Do your think the 1,370 year old religious text is the root locus or do you think something in the past decade or more is?

I'd say both... since that religious text is used an foundation to promote the shift in thinking/behavior.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

jmayo wrote: »

The US is a sh**show.
But of course it suits some people to drag in one of the most dysfunctional countries now in the so called Western world.

Oh and yes Brevik was probably the biggest single mass murder in Europe.
And yes he was right wing.

But why not add up all the French, Belgian, UK, German, Swedish, Spanish attacks and you soon pass Brevik's numbers.
192 in Madrid train attacks.
52 London bus/train attacks.


Then since you are fond of including other states to suit your purpose why not add in all the attacks in Russia.
For instance remember Beslan 385 dead or some of the Moscow tube attacks.

Then for the hell of it lets add in those attacks in Africa: Nigeria (remember Boko Haram and the thousands they have killed at this stage) Kenya, Tanzania.

Lets add in India with 209 in Mumbai attacks.
Then there is Indonesia and the Bali attacks.

And that doesn't include the thousands killed in the muslim world itself, often because they are the wrong shade of believer or not devout enough.

But yeah the real problem in the world is all those right wingers.

Oh, so now it's a case of we can't bring up other mass murders in order to make a connection between background ideaologies and motives? Or it background idealogy is only relevant if it's extremist Islam...?

If religion can be pinpointed as a motive for mass murder, why can't politics?

tayto lover

Feisar wrote: »

IMHO it's silly to expect people with nothing to do with something to have to condemn an act.

Well the dead can’t talk but many of the people who dived out of the way to avoid being driven over when walking across London Bridge, praying in the church in Nice, attending the concert in Paris etc etc have condemned the attacks as have the police in every one of those places.
We also use Boards to comment on football matches we have not played in, bands we have not played in and court cases we were not involved in (ask Overheal).
That is the purpose of these Boards surely?

Loverlyhorse

You apologists for fundamentalist islam are amazing. Why do you think there are so many Islamic extremists and murders worldwide?

biko

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

If religion can be pinpointed as a motive for mass murder, why can't politics?

Sure, look at Pol Pot in Kampuchea.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

biko wrote: »

Sure, look at Pol Pot in Kampuchea.

Getting close to Godwin here, but a certain European dictator of the past wasn't a muslim, so he's off limits.

Anyway, back on topic: if we can use extremist religion to portray the entire religion, why can't we use extemist political stances to portray all political stances?

Feisar

tayto lover wrote: »

Well the dead can’t talk but many of the people who dived out of the way to avoid being driven over when walking across London Bridge, praying in the church in Nice, attending the concert in Paris etc etc have condemned the attacks as have the police in every one of those places.
We also use Boards to comment on football matches we have not played in, bands we have not played in and court cases we were not involved in (ask Overheal).
That is the purpose of these Boards surely?

Yes we call come on here to natter about stuff we weren't involved in, sometimes know very little about. I was commenting on a perceived onus on Muslims generally to condemn these attacks.

OneLungDavy

Feisar wrote: »

IMHO it's silly to expect people with nothing to do with something to have to condemn an act.

"I take responsibility"

Overheal

Feisar wrote: »

Yes we call come on here to natter about stuff we weren't involved in, sometimes know very little about. I was commenting on a perceived onus on Muslims generally to condemn these attacks.

That’s a bit like asking “the white community” etc to both take responsibility for and condemn some act or another by the KKK.

After all I have muslim colleagues and I know if I asked for any one of their take on a stabbing they’d condemn it. That’s a lot different than the clear expectation here that Muslim at large embrace some collective responsibility for it. Isn’t that as problematic as expecting white Americans to accept blame and responsibility for and to repeatedly denounce the slave trade etc.? How much apologism and mass condemnation is adequate? Should 1.8 billion Muslims chip in and pay reparations to France?

Loverlyhorse

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Anyway, back on topic: if we can use extremist religion to portray the entire religion, why can't we use extemist political stances to portray all political stances?

If the political stances have a direct link to the underlying political ideology, then we already do! Nobody says "don't tarnish all Nazis because of the behaviour of a few".
It's obvious that the Nazi ideology leads to bad results. So you've just showed yourself up there!

Loverlyhorse

Overheal wrote: »

That’s a bit like asking “the white community” etc to both take responsibility for and condemn some act or another by the KKK.

It's absolutely not. Islam is not a race. You can convert to or leave the religion - not like skin colour at all. A ridiculous comparison.

A more apt comparison would be another ideology, either religious or political. E.g. its like asking Nazi political party to take responsibility for and condemn Nazi attacks on Jews. Which is 100% fair, given the ideology. Same applies to Islam.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Loverlyhorse wrote: »

If the political stances have a direct link to the underlying political ideology, then we already do! Nobody says "don't tarnish all Nazis because of the behaviour of a few".
It's obvious that the Nazi ideology leads to bad results. So you've just showed yourself up there!

Loverlyhorse wrote: »

A more apt comparison would be another ideology, either religious or political. E.g. its like asking Nazi political party to take responsibility for and condemn Nazi attacks on Jews. Which is 100% fair, given the ideology. Same applies to Islam.

I hear you're a fundamentalist now, father?

Loverlyhorse wrote: »

You apologists for fundamentalist islam are amazing. Why do you think there are so many Islamic extremists and murders worldwide?

You can't tell the difference between fundamentalism and moderate Islam, so why should I beleive you can identify Nazism from more moderate stances?

A muslim commits a murder - "they're all funsdamentalists and you're an apologist!"
A nazi commits a murder - "oh, you can't sya that's representative of right-wing politics, it was just a Nazi!"

Make your mind up.

jmayo

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So by your standards we can blame all Christians for mass shootings in Amerca? I mean it's a fact that the majority of school shootings over the decades have been done by young white Christian males therefore all white Christian males are to blame for these, have you ever come out and apologised for these sickening acts? If not then that must mean you support them.

I think Klaz covered this.

Your comparison is ridiculous because a huge chunk of the mass shootings in the US or the everyday huge murder rate has rarely anything to do with religion or indeed politics.
More often than not it is grudge related or drug related in terms of murders.

I can never recall any single attacker proclaiming anything about God or Jesus during their attacks.

Granted not sure about the Branch Davidians in Waco.
Then again they took on the federal forces not innocent people in a shopping centre or some form of transit station.

Overheal wrote: »

Yes there has been a documented increase in such attacks over the past decade or more.

Do your think the 1,370 year old religious text is the root locus or do you think something in the past decade or more is?

The attacks in Kenya and Tanzania happened in 90s.
The 911 attacks were 20 years ago give or take a few months.

And yes fundamentalist islam has been on the rise for decades and a lot of that has to do with the oil rich Arab states that are the best friends of some of the leading powers in the West.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Oh, so now it's a case of we can't bring up other mass murders in order to make a connection between background ideaologies and motives? Or it background idealogy is only relevant if it's extremist Islam...?

If religion can be pinpointed as a motive for mass murder, why can't politics?

Did I ever say politics can't be pinpointed as a motive.

But warning people about the evils of political right wing ideologies and ignoring one of the most right wing ideologies in the world because it happens to be a religion and the cause celebre of the liberally minded is stupid and really fooking dangerous.

Oh and the rise of the far right (you know the real one that idolises scum such as hitler and his final solution rather than ordinary people that don't think every fecker in the rest of the world has a right to come here) has a lot to do with the lunacy some of the liberal so called left wing are pushing.
Two cheeks of the same ar** kinda thing.

I say so called left wing because they care fook all about the old left wing principles of protecting the workers and the less well off.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

jmayo wrote: »

Did I ever say politics can't be pinpointed as a motive.

Being identified as a motive is not the same as using it to pinbpoint blame.

But warning people about the evils of political right wing ideologies and ignoring one of the most right wing ideologies in the world because it happens to be a religion and the cause celebre of the liberally minded is stupid and really fooking dangerous.

Oh and the rise of the far right (you know the real one that idolises scum such as hitler and his final solution rather than ordinary people that don't think every fecker in the rest of the world has a right to come here) has a lot to do with the lunacy some of the liberal so called left wing are pushing.
Two cheeks of the same ar** kinda thing.

I say so called left wing because they care fook all about the old left wing principles of protecting the workers and the less well off.

It's not about left or right or politics or religion it's about fundamentalism and extremism. If happens in both.

Blaming Islam is bascially admitting you don't know the difference between fundamentalism and moderate, not right-wing and Islam - this is what I'm saying when I bring up McVeigh, Brevic and so on: it's not their religion, or their politics, the connectiion is that they are extremists.

Just like the guy yesterday.

biko

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Biko, you made thriteen posts in this thread with the sole intention of attacking Islam, and now you're going to try and convince us - in post fourteen - that your primary interest in this is the victim...?

You're not fooling anyone.

Yes, my primary concern is Stéphanie, as I named in post 17.
Without killer Jamel Gorchane she would still be alive today.

The evidence so far points to an radical Islamist attack.
His ideology caused him to stab a woman in the neck, just like other attacks we have read about in this forum.

Do you have a solution for these attacks, or do you not?
Who will be the next Stéphanie?
I don't know yet but I know there sadly will be another.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

biko wrote: »

Yes, my primary concern is Stéphanie, as I named in post 17.
Without killer Jamel Gorchane she would still be alive today.

Again, I'm not falling for the idea that you suddenly care about the victim more than you want to get digs in at Islam.

The evidence so far points to an radical Islamist attack.
His ideology caused him to stab a woman in the neck, just like other attacks we have read about in this forum.

Yes HIS ideaoogy. Not his religions.
Are you saying that all Islam is extemistr?

Do you have a solution for these attacks, or do you not?
Who will be the next Stéphanie?
I don't know yet but I know there sadly will be another.

Do you?

I would put money on it happening again and again and the same sad sacks will defend it until they themselves are forced into hijabs and 2nd class citizenship (and maybe more). Sad really

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Were these young Christian males shouting about their religion (or basing their justifications due to their religious belief) when they engaged in the shootings? The motivation for the shootings weren't religious. There wasn't a core belief system to unify all the Christians as being even remotely responsible. And I think you'll find that most Christian groups condemned these attacks in America.

Whereas in the vast majority of attacks performed by Muslims, their religion is a core factor..

Come on. I get the need to draw comparisons.. but let's use comparisons that are actually relevant/similar.

And again lumping all Muslims into one when there are multiple sects, if a Catholic committed a crime in the name of religion tomorrow would it be ok to blame all Christians?

Timberrrrrrrr

biko wrote: »

Yes, my primary concern is Stéphanie, as I named in post 17.
Without killer Jamel Gorchane she would still be alive today.

The evidence so far points to an radical Islamist attack.
His ideology caused him to stab a woman in the neck, just like other attacks we have read about in this forum.

Do you have a solution for these attacks, or do you not?
Who will be the next Stéphanie?
I don't know yet but I know there sadly will be another.

Do you? Seriously...what's the solution to stopping these attacks seeing as the killer was in the country legally, had been there for many years, had no known connection to Islamic terrorism and wasn't on any watch lists...how do you stop someone like that?

Feisar

Loverlyhorse wrote: »

It's absolutely not. Islam is not a race. You can convert to or leave the religion - not like skin colour at all. A ridiculous comparison.

A more apt comparison would be another ideology, either religious or political. E.g. its like asking Nazi political party to take responsibility for and condemn Nazi attacks on Jews. Which is 100% fair, given the ideology. Same applies to Islam.

A fair point however there isn't a Muslim hive mind as far as I'm aware!

Timberrrrrrrr

Edz87 wrote: »

I would put money on it happening again and again and the same sad sacks will defend it until they themselves are forced into hijabs and 2nd class citizenship (and maybe more). Sad really

Ah would you stop! No one is defending anyone so take that shìte somewhere else. Yes it will happen again, what's your suggestion for stopping it happening again?

AmyMurphy22

Feisar wrote: »

A fair point however there isn't a Muslim hive mind as far as I'm aware!

Nope but there are central Muslim texts, which all Muslims say are sacred and inspired by God. Yet with an honest reading of these texts, these murders aren't surprising. Muslims need to come out and condemn the murderers and the verses that give rise to them.

Timberrrrrrrr

AmyMurphy22 wrote: »

Nope but there are central Muslim texts, which all Muslims say are sacred and inspired by God. Yet with an honest reading of these texts, these murders aren't surprising. Muslims need to come out and condemn the murderers and the verses that give rise to them.

Really? Can you point to the survey where all 1 billion+ Muslims said this?


Ugh...just seen join date :rolleyes:

TomTomTim

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And again lumping all Muslims into one when there are multiple sects, if a Catholic committed a crime in the name of religion tomorrow would it be ok to blame all Christians?

He didn't do what you claimed, but I think you know that. He said the religion is a core factor, which it is. How one interprets Islam is how one may get to a radical conclusion. The text book is where they find their justification. There's nothing in his words that says all Muslims are radicals. Regardless of his words, have you read the Koran? It's full of dubious stuff that could easily be used to justify terrorism.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

AmyMurphy22 wrote: »

Nope but there are central Muslim texts, which all Muslims say are sacred and inspired by God. Yet with an honest reading of these texts, these murders aren't surprising. Muslims need to come out and condemn the murderers and the verses that give rise to them.

That;s like saying all Catholics strictly adhere to catechism.

Timberrrrrrrr

TomTomTim wrote: »

He didn't do what you claimed, but I think you know that. He said the religion is a core factor, which it is. How one interprets Islam is how one gets to their radical conclusion. The text book is where their find their justification. There's nothing in his words that says all Muslims are radicals. Regardless of his words, have you read the Koran? It's full of dubious stuff that could easily be used to justify terrorism.

I've read the Koran, I've read the bible, I've also read the Torah....all of those books are "full of dubious stuff that could easily be used to justify terrorism".

seenitall

I think it is a mistake to consider the French problem with the Islamist insurgency in terms of Solutions. The flow of history doesn’t have “solutions”. It just is, and it always repeats in cycles. If you want to know the future of France or Europe, or anywhere else, take a look at its past. That’s all.