Slashdot Mirror
Gunmen Kill 12, Wound 7 At French Magazine HQ
An anonymous reader writes: A pair of gunmen have stormed the office of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, killing 12 people and wounding seven more. The magazine had recently published a cartoon of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and witnesses say the gunmen shouted, "we have avenged the Prophet Muhammad," before leaving. "Four of the magazine's well-known cartoonists, including its editor-in-chief Stephane Charbonnier were reported among those killed, as well as at least two police officers. Mr Charbonnier, 47, had received death threats in the past and was living under police protection." The attackers engaged police in a gunfire outside the building, then fled in a car. At the time of this writing, they are still at large. Currently, the BBC has the most information out of English news outlets. French speakers can consult the headline at Le Monde for more current news.
the religion of peace....
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
...is still trying to decide if it's Terrorism or Work Place Violence.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
...or 72 clones of themselves.
Issues involving free speech and threats to free speech is both a nerd issue and "news that matters." It also is a tech issue because improvements in communication have allowed people to get worked up all over the globe over things that are happening farther away that they wouldn't know about at all otherwise.
All anyone needs to know is that they shouted an Islamic religious oath. There is no need to pass along their actual message for them.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Inviting inflammatory discussion?
If the first two threads are any indication....
Now we can have the obligatory "Islam sucks" conversation, which will lead to the inevitable "all religion sucks" conversation, both of which are infinitely more enjoyable than simply leaving it at "Crazy people suck."
There's a low but non-zero chance that we might actually have an insightful conversation about free speech and the costs thereof but I wouldn't hold my breath. One of the new civil rights is the right not to be offended by anything at anytime....
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
All the more reason to share and repost the cartoon across the internet.
They bombed the London Tube for Allah
They bombed the Madrid train station for Allah
They crashed planes into the World Trade Center at NYC and at the Pentagon for Allah
A film director was murdered in the Netherlands for Allah
Hostages had been killed in Sydney for Allah
And now, at least 12 person have been cold-bloodedly slaughtered, in Paris, for Allah
In the name of "Allah", who will be the next victim ?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
...or 72 clones of themselves.
or 72 transsexual clones of Madonna impersonators.
When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
This is the response of the fascist ideology known as Islam to freedom of expression.
http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
http://news.yahoo.com/paris-sh...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Nah, it's just those cut-rate H1B programmers from the Indian subcontinent who suck.
1.) America protects the most nasty Mohammedanics - the Saudi Wahabists. They also did 9/11
2.) Here in Germany we have PEGIDA, who publicly protest the corrupt elite who do the appeasement.
3.) I hear UKIP and FN are actually also against the medivalist friends of America.
Now we can have the obligatory "Islam sucks" conversation, which will lead to the inevitable "all religion sucks" conversation, both of which are infinitely more enjoyable than simply leaving it at "Crazy people suck."
Actually, France has been dealing with a growing problem; namely, radical Islamists who have been busy turning entire neighborhoods within France into Sharia-run enclaves. No desire to integrate into society, and indeed, they'd prefer France become a caliphate.
Moderate voices, or efforts by moderate muslims to clamp down on this mess? Nowhere to be found.
The UK has been seeing a rise of this as well, and Germany has recently seen backlashes by neo-nationalist elements against similar problems found there.
Long story short, this is a hell of a lot more complex than you make it out to be, and points to a growing problem throughout the EU. The US sees only a small fraction of this issue (see also the town of Dearborn, MI) by comparison.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Only blind fuckers like you will continue to blame others for the crimes committed by the barbaric Islamists !
Fuck you !!!!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
How do you shoot up twelve people in the middle of Paris then get away? Wtf?
Charlie Hebdo is the name of the office you shot up, and i hardly imagine its going to avenge anything. 4 years ago, you firebombed the offices and razed them to ashes. It didnt work. Charlie Hebdo kept printing, and in the wake of something that would have sent any other newspaper in America scrambling to retreat Hebdo hardly seemed to care. Stephane Charbonnier, the editor in chief, issued a statement that referred to the attempt at censorship not as terrifying or vengeful, but just 'irritating.' You were nothing more than an irritation after property damage, but if history is any indication you've just opened a hundred new offices for Charlie Hebdos of all shapes and sizes. If you didnt want the prophet depicted, if he was in fact sacred, you've now effectively guaranteed Muhammad will be depicted voraceously, callously, and unabated for days to come.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Islam needs to reign in their junkyard dogs or else WW3 will happen soon. The problem with islam today is the mainstream muslim population is unwilling to tell their brothers to stop terrorist activity.
Are they scared, complacent or secretly in aggreement???
My trigger finger is on an Israeli Military Industries manufactured .50 cal and it is becoming more twitchy by the day.
: )
After their offices were firebombed in 2011, cartoonist and editor-in-chief Stéphane Charbonnier, who is rumored to be one of the causalities of today's attack, said he did not see the bombing as the work of French Muslims, but of what he called "idiot extremists." Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
Every media, newspaper, magazine, tv news outlet can provide their answer tommorow morning by posting direct on the front pages the cartoons of Mohammed - and simply state that Violence cannot, and will never win against the Pen.
However, media companies can also continue to self censorship as they have done now for many years, and leave small numbers of journalists and freedom fighters, to face these evil people on their own. Its a fucking call to arms - Its high time people understood on both sides that any form of respect towards a religion has to be earned and that religion will not be allowed to dictate what equates in terms of liberty and free speech.
This attack is the spear end of a much larger one on freedom, free speech and liberty by Islam and Muslims - and its been taking place over dacades. Its a serious fight, and should not end on the death of some Charles Hedbo office in France.
Every magazine and newspaper in France should publish the offending cartoons on their front pages. Show these assholes that they wouldn't silenced with violence.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
Some Charlie Hebdo cartoons with translation. ;-)
...
That would be great if magazines worldwide could support Charlie Hebdo and the free world by publishing some of these cartoons (with a better translation
1. "Mahomet is overwhelmed by fundamentalists" Balloon:"It's hard to be loved by jerks"
2. "Charia Hebdo" Balloon:"100 lashes if you do not LOL [Lit.: die loughing]"
3. "Coran is crap..." "It's not bullet proof"
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
The magazine had recently published a cartoon of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and witnesses say the gunmen shouted, "we have avenged the Prophet Muhammad," before leaving.
If only either The Prophet or his followers had a sense of humor or, in the latter case, intellect. I don't see how a cartoon about al-Baghdadi has anything to do with Muhammad. In any case, according to Wikipedia:
The Quran does not explicitly forbid images of Muhammad, but there are a few hadith (supplemental teachings) which have explicitly prohibited Muslims from creating visual depictions of figures. [citation needed] ... The key concern is that the use of images can encourage idolatry. [5]
So, the prohibition against imagery, if it even actually exists, doesn't seem to apply to non-Muslims - who, of course, are in no danger of being subverted by idolatry.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Here is uncensored video of the gunfight with a police officer, then the execution of the police officer. I think it's good for the public to see these kinds of things, so they can fully appreciate the reality of the threat posed to our society.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i...
Better known as 318230.
Yep
That's the modus operandi of your kind of apologists
Whenever them barbarians killing people in cold blood you guys will come out and blame the Christians, the Jews, and now, Moses !
Why don't you blame "GOD" instead ?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
or 72 transsexual clones of Madonna impersonators.
Could be worse. Could be 72 clones of Madonna.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Terrorists are people, who feel more threatened by a drawing than by drones,
Terrorists are people, who fear small girls with books more than death,
Terrorists are people, who use bullets because their mind cannot work with words,
they are not scared by torture or surveillance, but truth and freedom.
The Crusades were a series of events where the leaders of a religion (which believes there's an invisible Man up in the sky who makes you an offer you can't refuse) decided that going off to kill innocent people is a great idea and compatible with the faith.
It should seem very familiar to anyone in the modern age. Crusades then, crusades now. Same attitude, basically the same people.
Islam, you're the new Christianity. 900 years from now, you'll be known for your more subtle evils and call these days your totally-irrelevant long-reformed-from past, in which only a minority actually actively participated in the barbarism (the cowardly majority simply looking the other way). In 2900 you'll say you're pro-education but be rabidly anti-education. You'll preach words of Love and teach values of Hate. All Muslims should journey to a Colorado Springs megachurch, to preview their future.
Bonus conversation: All religious people are, by definition, crazy.
Whoa! You're a brave man...,Anonymous.
Maybe instead of representing solidarity with a silly hashtag it'd better for us all to exercise free speech by posting a picture of Muhammad. Not an overly offensive picture either, a simple stick man would do.
This craziness isn't going to stop until the media and us people in general start standing up for the things that we're always claiming to hold dear.
Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
Why just France? I think every magazine & newspaper the world over that respects their profession should publish the offending cartoons.
When the Islamists kill innocent people we shall not blame them
Instead, we should blame the Christians
We should blame Moses
We should also blame Yahweh
No sirree ! Them Islamic barbarians are blameless !
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
As Christopher Hitchens or Steven Weinberg said, "With or without religion, good people will do good and bad people will do evil. But for good people to do evil, that takes religion."
We're being overrun by Islamics in the name of political correctness.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
At the gun lobby likes to remind us: guns don't kill people, religions do
Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
Obligatory "why is this on /." comment found. Answer is always the same: Stuff That Matters. If you don't think 12 people dying to mad shooters because they made cartoons matters, go check in at your nearest psychological institute.
AK-47 are not on the list of easily accessible firearms in France.. Tough, last I check you could get them pretty easily in the south of France...
Actually, it probably would. People are drawn to ideologies that support their inclinations. Someone craving violence would just move on to a more aggressive religion and leave your religion to the bronies. Note that no scientologists have gone on a rampage in some time. That is because that religion draws naive sheep with disposable income and a need to feel wanted... not your typical psychopath.
as an american, i am confronted with limits other democracies put on free speech sometimes. for example: germany disallows nazi symbolism. as an american i am not as threatened by this symbol, as nazism never overran my country, and so i find myslef at first opposed to the german limitation as a violation of the right to free speech
but on deeper thought, i understand why germany would want to do this, and i see no conflict with free expression in the end. because the nazi symbol in germany clearly represents the ideology of ending free expression violently
so there is no logical conflict: all rights have natural, logical limits, they are not endless. in regards to the special case of using freedoms to actively seeking the destruction of freedoms
for example: you have a right to life, unless you threaten another person's life
you have the right to a free press, unless you use that right to call for violent limits on the free press
and, now, my point here: you have a right to free expression, unless you use it to advocate a limit on free expression violently
i'm not saying someone can't say "you should not say that." i'm saying no one should be able to say "if you say that, i will kill you"
no one should be allowed to use freedoms granted to them to deny others freedom
in this way, we have the right to limit hateful violent religious speech that calls for the destruction of the tolerance that allows that hateful violent religious speech to be spoken, and we are not violating our own free speech principles. the logical failure is with using freedoms to deny freedoms, not with the opposition to doing that. just like with nazi symbols in germany: it is not logically inconsistent with free speech to limit that symbol, because the symbol means destroying free speech
so i believe france should have the right to limit all religious speech that calls for the ending of fundamental rights violently. jail or expel imams and groups that call for violent attacks on free speech. there is no logical conflict with a rights-loving democracy to do that, because the only thing being limited is the cancer that actively seeks to end rights
there is no slippery slope here: no one should be allowed to oppose a fundamental freedom with violence. you invoke the right to stop someone's speech ONLY if that speech calls for violence to end to free speech
intolerance of intolerance is not the same thing as intolerance itself
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Some people get sidetracked by the religious aspect, but that isn't what is really going on. Europe gets bullied easily (Russia for instance) and they encourage it by their behavior and reactions. Muslim extremists sense this weakness and exploit it. Expect more censorship and fear.
France has had many of these types of events in the last year. There will be more.
Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
Now we can have the obligatory "Islam sucks" conversation, which will lead to the inevitable "all religion sucks" conversation, both of which are infinitely more enjoyable than simply leaving it at "Crazy people suck."
I would hope our society is becoming advanced enough to jump straight to "all religion sucks" instead of having to dwell on criticizing a single religion as if today's terrorism is any different than the crusades. Its only the fact that the western world doesn't pay attention to our religions as much that makes our religions seem more enlightened.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
never mind the fact that this has been posted here well after it's already been on every other media outlet.. but why is this on /.?
Are freedom-of-speech issues not one of Slashdot's common themes?
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Yahweh in the old testament is pretty much a real son of a bitch, no different than the angry father next door beating his kid for their lack of compliance. Though, somehow, you call the cop on latter, and prey the former.
The kind of guns used by these terrorists is ALREADY banned... that didn't prevent them from having such guns.
Bad idea, I rather than suggest to sentence them to draw Mahomet until death.
Achille Talon
Hop!
i guess im still relatively new enough to not realize that this comment was cliche, so apologies for that (i guess) but i still fail to see why this is 'stuff that matters'. if you mean 'stuff that matters' in terms of making people 'afraid' of a ghost threat which will be used to further give control to lying government/deep state entities, then i guess you're right. unfortunately, i suspect you believe it 'matters' because you are naive enough to believe what the pretty lady reading off the teleprompter tells you.
Obviously, the neo-con security policies haven't worked either.
Obviously a ban is not the same thing as a well enforced ban.
Note that the most recent comparable incident in the UK involved two Muslim men hacking a soldier to death with a machete. But there was only one death. It's much easier to kill people, much faster, with guns than with machetes. The UK has been very serious about gun control though, so the lack of guns in the last attack wasn't a huge surprise.
..where you're not going to find any. Either in their book of fairy tales, sorry, "holy koran" or in their dimwitted brains. Religion - particularly islam - abhors logic and rationality since enables people to see it for the bunch of lies, fantasies and half truths that it really is.
you mean in terms of things that will likely allow for increased popular support to allow our government to further take away our freedom of speech (by the screaming ninny emotional responses by so many here?) yes. i suppose i stand corrected.
i steal this quote from another blogger, who i think put it well:
"Whenever emotional events like this happen many will jump to conclusions as to who, what, when, where and how. Our governments however have shown that they are completely untrustworthy. I will wait until we get more facts and not just the official sources before deciding what happened here. "
The stance should be global, ie. a cartoon of Mohammad, Jesus and other religious symbol all having a (pansexual) orgy together.
Actually more than you would think. Still no justification for moslem to do the same or christian or anybody. I view both extremist as both equally sociopathic assholes.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Well, the real question is, do the gunmen use Linux?
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Let's hear it for religion. Again.
Yeah, Mother Theresa was pretty vile.
Ever hear of The Inquisition? How about Catholic pedophile priests? And WTF does the Vatican need with its estimated $45 billion net worth?
The catholic religion is pretty fucking vile.
Nobody seems to be doing any real analysis.. but from the summary, I find it interesting that these perpetrators believe that insulting the head of ISIS is equivalent of insulting Mohammed. After all, Islam was not at all harmed here, the satire was directed at the head of ISIS. Yet, that was enough to trigger an attack. This isn't really a religious based attack, but more of a revenge and a show of force. This is true terrorism as they are demonstrating that ISIS can reach anywhere. It also makes France looking quite weak.
If anything this attack will cause France to make some kind of mistake that would further cause extremism in their muslim population and possibly creating more recruits for ISIS. The attack will also demonstrate to extremist elements in the muslim population that ISIS has power.
If I was France, I would be looking at both social/economic reforms for these folks, and also restrict further immigration from Arabic countries until they can figure out how to resolve this crisis.
AKA Dearbornistan.
My worry is, though the moderate majority may indeed intend no harm nor foul to non-muslims, if the time comes when their hand is forced to pick a side when things get more heated, I'm betting more than half will fall on the side of their islamic brethren.
I'm also sick of hearing people, including Obama, state that IS is "not Islamic". I've never heard a more prime example of the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Isn't this a picture of the Muhammad that they 'avenged' the same guy who admitted to have 'married' a 9-year-old girl?
Doesn't that mean his picture would have to be published on the child sex offender website as a statutory rapist?
I also read that this is the same guy who admitted to being possessed by the spirit of Satan as a way of explaining his mistakes.
It's seems odd to 'avenge' him... After all, these admissions were specifically included in the book about him so that everyone would remember he wasn't an 'avenge me' worthy kind of guy.
Maybe someone will find a way to avenge that little girl. Perhaps the leaders could at least offer an apology to her descendants?
Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
* From what I understand when you use "moderate" in front of muslim, I would probably call them just "muslim" or "normal muslim", but I have kept your word.
Yahweh in the old testament is pretty much a real son of a bitch, no different than the angry father next door beating his kid for their lack of compliance. Though, somehow, you call the cop on latter, and prey the former.
My history is a little rusty, but isn't yahweh of the old testament and allah the same god?
The US sees only a small fraction of this issue (see also the town of Dearborn, MI) by comparison.
The US sees quite a bit of this issue, just not with Muslims.
Exactly what kind of backlash would be absurd? Demanding that they tread pig blood on an image of the prophet before entering the country? The analogous didn't work out so well for Japan, but that doesn't make it inherently absurd.
It appears (I'm not certain on this point) that Muslims don't consider their word to be sufficient to bind them to follow the laws of the country in which they live. What I'm not certain is that they made any such promise. (If we're talking about religious motivations and matters of honor and faith, then practical matters like prospect of physical punishment shouldn't signify.)
It would be interesting to know whether the perpetrators were French citizens or not. The most radical Muslims I've encountered were native US citizens who had converted.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I can easily agree with your points, and you're right - immigrants are treated like shit in the EU (though more out of fear of what happens to the local culture/economy/etc than out of any generic racism or hatred). Compounding this is the fact that most of the EU member nations do not guarantee many of the basic protections that we enjoy here (well they do, but such protections are not as inviolable and enshrined-from-the-start as they are here - e.g. freedom of speech, religion, etc.)
Compounding things further, there is still the issue of non-integration. To be fair, each EU nation has a specific culture, which is generally held in higher regard than the desires of newly-minted citizens (unlike the US, where we generally don't have a 'culture' per se, let alone give it primacy.) Thing is, if you want to *stay* in France, Germany, the UK, etc, one would think that integration would be a top priority, if only for success and stature within your local society.
To be fair again, the US has a bit of a problem with integration, specifically with Latino populations. But again, a Latino enclave doesn't use religion as a basis to set their own laws or to kill anyone who mocks them in the public arena... France on the other hand...
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
if anything, directly because of this incident, the slander of not only islam, its followers, the "prophet" "muhammad" -- who is far from it -- should not only continue, but they should increase. These people are animals, they are monkeys, they should all be slaughters. Anyone who believes in the subjugation of women, the slaughter of children, the removal of education, all these primitive animals, they have no place in civilized society. Islam is bullshit. You want to pull out a gun and start shooting and shouting god is great, fuck you, and you should be sent back to the third world you came from. The belief system is flawed, its wrong, its bullshit, anyone who thinks in that way should be removed and deported.
Actually Man here. Actually, whoosh on you. He was being sarcastic, too.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
"Only" is already too much, especially for the victim and his family and friends.
Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
Never has this quote from Voltaire been more true:
Those who can make people believe absurdities can make them commit atrocities.
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
I suspect you meant that a jest, but she was actually fairly vile. One opinion: http://www.stuff.co.nz/aucklan...
There is crazy, and then there is Crazy. This is one of the things I dislike about the "i'm insane" defense in judicial systems. Just because you do something so abhorrent, by default it is "Crazy" to normal people.
"Crazy" would be if a carrot told these people to attack cartoonists with spoons and forks. Clearly mentally disturbed crazy.
Here you have multiple people that are motivated by dogma and ideology, identify with a group of radical violent people, who identify themselves with a particular religion. They are not crazy, they react with intent and planning, determination and commitment. They are dangerous criminals and terrorists.
The question isn't about all of those who practice Islam falling into this category, it is about why so many people seem to become radicalized. Is it culturally about where much of Islam is located, or does it have more to do fundamentally with the religion itself?
It seems these events are pretty common, the perpetrators condemned by the peaceful Islamic community, but then find out they attended the same mosques as the peaceful condemners. That is when this "crazy" terminology starts getting thrown around to diminish the relevance of it all. It isn't like these people are attending some secret evil underground mosques... Though some do seem to go travelling for "training" abroad, you have to be pretty much already committed to do that however.
in light of this, i suspect the French have every reason to ban Arab-style head garments and perhaps even some support for requiring all Muslims in their country to register, and wear little green triangles on their coats so they're easier to see in a crowd of Frenchmen.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
I want to open a BBQ place here in America, where the spokespig is named Mohammed.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
How about "all of the above, and a few more"? This is one of the virtues of having a wider readership that engages in commentary. Follow the threads that interest you and ignore the others.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Which is the worst offender? Sorry, I believe you think that I should conclude that its Islam, but to me it still seems that Christianity has the edge. Islam hasn't yet tried to bring on the end of the world, as some powerful Christian groups have. The tools they have used were political, and they haven't been successful, but they have tried, are still trying, and some are near the centers of power.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
This can't be true. France has some pretty strict gun control laws. Terrorists and criminals should not e a ble to get hold of such weaponry. These reports must be wrong.
Have gnu, will travel.
Virtually everybody knew these guys.
Among them, Cabu was particularly well known by French and Belgian people of my generation (1975).
He was, among other things, a caricaturist on a widely watched children/teenagers show that started in 1978, with the kind of lasting impression you can imagine on our young minds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
I have heard of those things. But when you wrote, "Let's hear it for religion. Again." it wasn't clear whether your were saying all religiously inspired activity was bad, or just some.
I assumed you meant "all", because I don't see why you would have bothered commenting that some people claiming to be in group $X do evil stuff. Most of us assume that's true for just about any value of X.
My sister has encountered this in Dublin - where she lives there's a [relatively] large muslim population. Unlike the generation of immigrants from the 70s, these ones want nothing to do with Irish life. Over there it's pretty common to nod or say hello to people on the street, and especially so if you're in the country side. She's had a few times where she started chatting to a [obvious] muslim couple when hiking and they've been pretty uncomfortable - the men doesn't like talking to strange women and the women don't appear to like talking to strangers. Her solution now is to be more cheerful and chatty the more rude and distant they are. There's no way I could ever describe her as right-wing, but she's got a point - if you're going to live here, you better learn to deal with our social customs.
AC - for identification purposes.
Mother Theresa was a closeted atheist:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/d...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
So what you are saying is that radical Muslims are expanding their territories by creating settlements within other countries...I wonder where they got an idea like that?
sarcasm. text doesn't carry it.
To be fair again, the US has a bit of a problem with integration, specifically with Latino populations.
I'm not sure I'd agree with that; all of the second or later generation Latinos I know are at least as "American" as I am, if not more so. It's hard to define what "American" means exactly but in this context I'm referring to assimilation; they've thoroughly assimilated by the time of the second generation. Even the first generation immigrations I know are fairly well assimilated after a few years here; whatever barriers remain there are typically more related to age than culture, for example, the Grandparents of my Mexican friends would find a lot in common with my own Grandparents with regards to cultural conservatism.
Thing is, if you want to *stay* in France, Germany, the UK, etc, one would think that integration would be a top priority, if only for success and stature within your local society.
Culture changes over time even without immigration. Those who cling to past romanticized ideals of their own culture are doomed to disappointment and resentment.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Wouldn't then a better example be a submission about the EU trying to limit freedom of speech and assembly as a result of this shooting? And not articles strictly about a massacre on the streets of a city?
Except that in the UK, the ban -- which they take very, very seriously -- actually DOES result in significantly less gun violence.
You may be personally opposed to a ban, but you can't argue in good faith that a bans can't EVER work when we have very clear examples of bans doing exactly what they set out to do.
People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
A couple days ago, I learned about the New Year's Day Speech by the Egyptian President. ..http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/01/egypts-president-sisi-calls-for-islamic-religious-revolution/
He called for a deep revolution in thought about the tenets of Islam. He believes that Muslims are destroying themselves and their credibility with the world with the violence being done in the name of Islam.
After I heard about the events in Paris, I really wanted to hear what he has to say. I think he would be dismayed, and point to it as an example of what he was saying.
All that internet and telephone snooping really payed off, didn't it..
I'll see that and raise you that every entity in the world that profits from the freedom of speech should have pick one day out of the year to post the most insane inflammatory depictions of Muhammad they can think up.
Yahweh in the old testament is pretty much a real son of a bitch, no different than the angry father next door beating his kid for their lack of compliance. Though, somehow, you call the cop on latter, and prey the former.
My history is a little rusty, but isn't yahweh of the old testament and allah the same god?
Pretty much. A large part of the Koran is just a retelling of the old testament. While the Koran says that Christians are the most like the Moslems, both Christianity and Judaism are "People of the Book". It's just that the teachings of earlier prophets who taught those two religions were corrupted.
Not being allowed to cover your face completely is not the same as telling people what they can and cannot wear
Yes, actually it is. Justify it however you want; it's a manifestation of France's hostility towards religion and if you had bothered to follow both links you would have noted that they target such policies at Jews as well as Muslims. In any event, it's not my place to tell the French how to run their country, but if they're going to bellyache about resentment amongst immigrant populations you should take a hard look in the mirror and ask yourself where such resentment is coming from.
I don't live in a part of the United States with a large Muslim community (Upstate New York) but even I occasionally see people wearing face coverings in public. Guess what? It doesn't hurt me or mine one damned bit. Why the French feel the need to legislate this is beyond me. Send the immigrants to the United States if you don't like them so much; we'll take them in and make them our own. Meanwhile France's (actually the EU as a whole) demographic problem will continue to get worse and worse. The EU has a binary choice at the end of the day: Have more babies or welcome immigrants.
However, it doesn't change the fact that it is a foreign language to them and since it's your native language, they're already making an effort to accommodate you and if you didn't show that you appreciate it, it's hardly surprising that you got hostility in return.
I didn't say I got "hostility"; I said I saw treatment of immigrant communities that was shocking to my North American sensibilities. The Canadians I knew made the same observation so it wasn't some uniquely American perspective that I had which was offended. On balance I had positive experiences; I'd go back there in a New York Minute. All I'm saying is I can see how easily it is for immigrant communities in the EU to feel marginalized, and Finland is one of the best EU countries with regards to the integration of new arrivals.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
I say the same thingd about those Scotrsman all the time.
BTW. You might be interested in what happened at Kunming railroad station in march or Osaka school in japan. I'm sure there is more. Knives or blade weapons are not innefective. Especially in close quarters. In fact, withing about 20 feet of distance, you can be killed by a knife faster than you could draw a gun and defend yourself.
Mother Theresa was a closeted atheist:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/d...
It seems to me she was more of a closet agnostic.
She's had a few times where she started chatting to a [obvious] muslim couple when hiking and they've been pretty uncomfortable
Finnish people behave in a similar manner when confronted with pointless small talk; is it okay to deliberately annoy the shit out of them too?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
My hat's off to the murder victims. They had the guts and the courage of conviction to take on Islam. Let us honor these brave Frenchmen and their country.
My fellow Americans like to joke about French surrender and Googling French military victories ('no results found"). But that seems absurd to me because it's the French doing all the brave things while Americans cower in fear.
I do not see CNN or Fox News or Huffington Post or any other American paper taking on Islam. Politically correct cowardice is rampant in America, home of the chickens. American activists bravely take on Silicon Valley tech firms and Xbox gamers for misogyny while completely ignoring the Islamic treatment of women. That's like attacking a kid for playing with water balloons while ignoring the mafia guy next to him planting C4 car bombs. But I guess even cowards have to make themselves feel good by doing something... as long as there's no danger to themselves. Safety is important!
Dr. George Tiller was murdered (ironically in the doorway of his church) by a Christian zealot for daring to assist women in controlling their own freaking bodies.
But this does point out the one common bedrock of all organized religions: the control and subjugation of women, up to and including rape and murder.
Fuck religion (all of them).
i guess im still relatively new enough to not realize that this comment was cliche, so apologies for that (i guess) but i still fail to see why this is 'stuff that matters'.
No need to apologize. This kind of story would have never made it to the site pre-11 Sep 2001. When posting a story about the WTC and Pentagon attacks, CmdrTaco mentioned he would not normally include something like that on the site because it wasn't topical but decided to make an exception.
However, the thousands of comments made on that story opened their eyes to the possibility of using stories like this as clickbait for ad impressions and to inflate traffic numbers. Thus, they proceeded down the path to the dark side, and the community came up with this "stuff that matters" semantic retcon to justify posting anything at all, even though in the past stories nominally had to satisfy both constraints ("news for nerds AND stuff that matters").
Looks like Dice is working on retiring slogan altogether. A more honest version currently would be "Tech News or Whatever We Think the 'Audience' Might Flame War Over. Oh, and Your Car Insurance Hopes You'll Never Guess This One Neat Trick That Happened Next..."
History repeats. The intellectuals that started the Russian Revolution got bum-rushed (and ice-axed) by their own thugs (Stalin and Beria).
There's a call to rename every French paper "Charlie Hebdo" tomorrow in protest.
http://www.lalibre.be/actu/int... (in French)
Some people will indeed find a way round a ban.
But many won't.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Even faster with a bomb. And trying to restrict bomb-making materials is essentially impossible - unless you want to restrict civilization advances from about 900 AD and forward...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
aaah - that makes heaps of sense. thanks for pointing that out.
Marxism IS religion masked as policy. islam is politic masqed as religion.
Gold is not very useful unless you believe it is valuable.
Don't you wish some of those slain had firearms to defend themselves? The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
Actually, France has been dealing with a growing problem; namely, radical Islamists who have been busy turning entire neighborhoods within France into Sharia-run enclaves. No desire to integrate into society, and indeed, they'd prefer France become a caliphate.
Maybe it has something to do with continuing racism and lack of employment opportunities for French-born muslims. If employment opportunities (or the ability for these folks to be able to profitably self-employ) existed, the interest in extremist fundamentalism would probably be greatly dampened.
African Americans in the USA have the same problems that Muslims do in France - they were brought over for cheap/slave labor and were not repatriated (how do you do such a thing) after the work was no longer needed (or had been automated). However in France, the religion is different as well - and one that's been in violent conflict with Christianity for millennia.
I'm surprised there hasn't been more such incidents.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
The invisible hand is really just trying to say that the overall economics of the system are an emergent property of what goes on at lower levels... i.e. the price of wheat is a direct result of many individual buy and sell transactions. they just didn't have the concepts to describe it back then.
The answer is to hunt down, arrest, and prosecute the people who perform terrorist acts, whether they are doing it for the glory of Islam or because they hate all police officers, or because they think all black youth are criminals, or because they think Israel the state should not exist, or because they were following terrorist orders from superiors. Sometimes terrorists do have a point, but nobody including would-be terrorists has the right to use terrorism to make their point.
Might as well face it I'm addicted to data.
"Religion is a gateway psychosis." - Dave Foley
How about finding some modern examples that have some relevance instead of going back 200+ years to find your "evidence"? Islam is currently trying to destroy civilizations. Not 100 years ago. Not just in one country. They are doing it across the world and across many different cultures.
That you see them as equivalents is laughable to all but the most gullible.
And yet those on the left in the US are constantly yammering on about how we should not be expecting any kind of integration, especially culturally, here in the US either. I used to view myself as enjoying a multi-cultural outlook because I like different ethnic foods and I find some of the different ethnic holiday traditions and such quite entertaining and then I realized that the true definition of multi-culturalism is that immigrant communities should isolate themselves and practice only the traditions from their "homeland" and never dilute that with anything remotely considered American.
In my opinion, the real problem is fanaticism. During the Enlightenment, the words "enthusiasm" and "fanaticism" both had very negative connotations. To be an "enthusiast" meant that you were someone who passionately believed in an idea without a rational reason. If you were a "fanatic", you were willing to kill for your "enthusiasms". In relation to this, the French philosopher Voltaire once wrote: "Those who can make people believe absurdities can make them commit atrocities." To believe that drawing a cartoon of any particular person merits a death penalty is clearly absurd.
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
Uh yes, France decided to tell people that they cannot completely veil themselves in public spaces because terrorists were talking about doing exactly that. Heaven forbid that a schoolgirl should actually show her face to her teachers and fellow students so that everyone can interact properly in the classroom.
So people being killed because they dared to publish some satire that mocks living and dead people does not matter in your world? Are you saying that people only care about the free expression of ideas because pretty people informed them about it? What exactly are you trying to say?
Would you feel the same way if some Amish people went on a rampage and destroyed the offices of FSF for daring to promote the use of modern technology?
Are you saying we should just live our lives and keep to ourselves and never discuss the goings on around us? Why then did you create an account at a site dedicated to discussing the goings on around us?
Oh, you are one of those... Yes, please do wait for the more credible sources to inform you that this attack was not actually carried out by Islamic terrorists but was instead carried out by the bush families henchmen for the purpose of drumming up support to Jeb's presidential campaign and that it might also be possible that Obama's henchmen provided transportation (and special effects support from Hollywood) so that he could further clamp down on the political cartoonists here in the US.
In the meantime, please stay out of the conversation until such time as you have proof of this conspiracy to contribute.
The New Testament supersedes the Old, so the post is invalid. This applies to most branches of Christianity. The parent poster is either trolling or ignorant of that which he is criticizing (my guess: copy-pasting random collection from teh intrawebs). The various interpretations are all aligned with this. Catholics, for example, interpret the Law of Moses (the Old Law) as a preparation for the Gospel, and as such no longer binding; the New Law (the Law of Gospel) is a perfection of it, delivered through faith in JC. Disclaimer: I'm an agnostic atheist (as in, no god with 85% confidence).
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
You checked? Like, you went to France and attempted to buy AKs?
I don't even know how easy it is to buy automatic weapons in my own city, where laws are fairly permissive and gun ownership is not looked upon negatively, on average.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Newton was in the news for weeks. It's spawned major legislation in some states. Rodeo Clown was pretty exercised about it.
This attack will forgotten in the U.S. by Friday.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
All this "put to death" stuff helped open the door to the genius of Christianity (as opposed to Old Testament Judaism):
Here comes a dude who tells people that "death" really means "no heaven" and gives you a simple out on pretty much everything on the list just by confessing your sins and rededicating yourself to God. Now which religion do you prefer?
Yahweh, Allah, God.... all the same, different languages. Judaism has lots of prophets, but Jesus ain't the messiah; Christianity ignores most of the prophets (although Catholicism has so, so , so many saints), and Jesus is their messiah; Islam has lots of prophets, Jesus and Mohammed being two of them.
I've always found it fascinating that Christians in the US, who supposedly are all about Jesus, blindly support Judaism which says point blank: Jesus wasn't the messiah, yet they are so vocally opposed to Islam which says that Jesus was a prophet of God.
I chalk it down to ignorance, stupidity... or both.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
As Debbie Schlussel says, I think it's 72 Helen Thomases.
Actually, those on the left keep saying that government shouldn't be used to FORCE integration if the individuals don't want to integrate... you know, that whole PERSONAL FREEDOM thing.... while the conservatives on the right are all about using government to abuse the rights of individuals, especially of anyone different than them.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Nobody's claiming that guns are the only way of killing people. However, ceremonial functions aside, most armies these days have abandoned swords and spears; I assume they did this for a reason.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
President Holland declared that France will stand for freedom of speech with more than 100000 people marching out to support it.
Meanwhile in Lithuania just today two Russian TV channels were banned because of their 'one-sided views' on lots of problems.
My understanding is that the reason for *not* showing the prophet, was because he wasn't supposed to become an idol and detract from the worship of God/Allah. Now, if somebody portrays the prophet, it's a blasphemous depiction because he's some sacred figure... except isn't that exactly what he WASN'T supposed to be?
Personally, I consider all religions nonsense but certainly support the right of people to be able to have whatever stupid beliefs they have.
I think we've identified the source of your complete lack of sympathy. I suspected as much of course but thanks for confirming it.
However, there is a line that needs to be drawn somewhere when people don't just hold their own thoughts but interact with each other - i.e. how much immigrants need to adapt and how far the EU accommodates to their preferences
Dictating the manner in which someone can dress in public serves no legitimate reason other than to marginalize them. Personally I find it incredibly fucking irritating when youth wear baggy pants that expose their undergarments but legislation against such behavior in the United States is rightfully struck down on freedom of expression laws. My style of dress does not cause you harm and you have no right to try and control it.
Accommodating too much to religion causes resentment among agnostics and atheists and that's what the vast majority of young people in Europe are.
You're not accommodating anything by allowing people to dress as they choose, unless of course you offend so easily that merely seeing a religious person is enough to make you run to your MP. Just call it what it is: thinly veiled bigotry, against a people and faith that you can't be bothered to understand. And if you're going to legislate such bigotry into law do both yourselves and them a favor and stop letting them into your countries in the first place. My country would be happy to take them in and we'll emerge stronger and better for it.
People who brave enough to flee their country of birth are exactly the sort that the West needs to remain viable in the 21st century. It's a pity that you can't see that or what's going to happen to the EU if you don't address your demographics problem. Have fun paying for that social safety net you're so proud of when you have no young people to pay into the system.
But I repeat, concealing your face is just as obscene to some as full nudity to others. Should both be allowed?
Public breastfeeding offends some people but I'm fairly certain such behavior is protected and even encouraged in the EU. Again, you're just choosing to use secularism as a cloak for bigotry. I'm not buying it and neither are your un-assimilated immigrants. To answer your stupid question though, yes, both should be allowed. Seeing a naked person does not harm me. Neither does seeing someone totally covered. Of course private property owners should be free to set whatever standards they wish for admittance onto their property.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Like, I was over in England. You ever been to England, anyone, been to England? No one has handguns in England, not even the cops. True or false? True. Now-in England last year, they had fourteen deaths from handguns. FFFFFourteen. Now-the United States, and I think you know how we feel about handguns-woooo, I'm getting a warm tingly feeling just saying the fucking word, to be honest with you. I swear to you, I am hard. Twenty-three thousand deaths from handguns. Now let's go through those numbers again, because they're a little baffling at first glance. England, where no one has guns, fffffffourteen deaths. United States, and I think you know how we feel about guns-woooo, I'm getting a stiffy-twenty-three thousand deaths from handguns. But there's no connection, and you'd be a fool and a Communist to make one. There's no connection between having a gun and shooting someone with it, and not having a gun and not shooting someone. There have been studies made and there is no connection at all there. Yes. That's absolute proof. You know, fourteen deaths from handguns. Probably American tourists, too.
++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
Every time I see the crusades brought up as Christians being bad...I just weep for the education system in the country you live in.
The crusades were a reaction to the invasion of modern day Israel by Muslims, who then would prevent all other religions from visiting ancient holy sites. There was good reason for the crusades happening, as the Muslim conquerors acted much the same as ISIS currently acts. The Christians that participated in the crusades did some terrible things, but is that any different than any other war of the time?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
if by one of those you mean person with working brain, then yes i am. if by 'conversation' you mean people using half their time ranting and raving about what is told to them by governments (who spend the other half of their time talking about how those same govenments lie all the time), then i will gladly refrain.
the level of denial and cognitive dissonance is deafening. if you really want proof, it's staring at you in the face. if you really want to know, read on. i refer to 9/11, ONLY because inherent in that is the 1 unmistakable fuckup which exposes the farce. they allowed 7 wtc to be filmed as it came down - in real time.. never mind ANYTHING else about that day. if you believe in the laws of physics , then you will know that only a controlled demolition could have caused it to come down AT free-fall speed. simple. done. all the 'rebuttals' dodge that issue, and talk about how it took damage blah blah blah. simple as that. free-fall of the building is not physically possible outside controlled demolition. once you realize that, and that the official narrative is not true, you begin to question a lot of things, but i'll leave all that alone. i doubt you will have gotten past your deeply ingrained fear of the realizing you don't live in the world you were raised to believe you were. thats ok. if this blows your mind, then good. you asked me for it. if it doesn't, then there is no reaching you at this stage. might as well keep believing jesus rode dinosaurs.
dude. you have an active imagination.. that's good. you allow it to warp your perception of reality in the here and now.. that's not so good.
Those are Old Testament rules, not Christian rules. Jesus and the New Testament changed the rules. Jesus actively interfered with enforcing such rules, ex. "cast the first stone".
When was the last time you heard of such rules being enforced? Modern "honor killings" come time mind, and those practicing honor killings don't seem to be misguided heretics of the Christian variety.
Wouldn't this guarantee that seven billion people see the cartoons in question?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
Don't be ridiculous. There are lots and LOTS of things that can stop a bad guy with a gun that aren't a gun at all. At least some of them are available in almost every office. I bet getting stabbed in both eyes by a pen would stop pretty much any bad guy with a gun.
You don't even have to get that brutal, though brutal always works. One bad guy with a gun at the bottom of a pile of 20 guys is pretty well stopped, and not one of them has to have a gun to do it.
You've probably never read Charlie Hebdo, but I'm pretty sure none of those guys would have carried a gun.
Police officers protecting the newspaper's office were armed and died anyway.
What kind of gun do you carry with you which can be effective against an assault rifle ?
What training do you have which makes you think you could stop military trained attackers (as it seems this was the case in this assault) ?
(white) Dearborn, MI resident here.
While the east side is predominantly Arabic, I haven't seen too much of the extremism I hear about in Europe these days. I know the population in Dearborn is typically Lebanese (and now increasingly Iraqi due to the wars) so perhaps it is a completely different sect of the religion. Headscarves are common place and the occasional burka is seen, but overall everyone seems very liberal and laid back. To me it is no different than any other large city with it's various ethnic "towns" within.
Oh dear.
Leaders in the west should make it clear that those who want Sharia law should go elsewhere. There are plenty of countries with Islamic law, where those who hate freedom of speech, equality, and rights of others can live. True we cannot force them to leave but this would set their expectations for living in secular democracies
"turning entire neighborhoods within France into Sharia-run enclaves"
BS. Examples, please.
Why leave it to the papers? Why leave it to the (cowardly according to American opinion) French?
EVERYONE should put one of Charlie Hebdo's caricature onto one's homepage.
This one seems to be fitting especially if you are a Jew (Texts reads in my miserable translation "You shall not critizise us").
Another nice one reads again miserably translated "Darling, I 'm just downstairs for 5 Minutes to search for that Journal" (not sure that actually is from Charlie Hebdo but it came up on google).
If you want others, especially if you are a Muslim and consider the above not annoying enough, there are more examples although lacking translation.
Except that in the UK, the ban -- which they take very, very seriously -- actually DOES result in significantly less gun violence.
Handguns were banned in 1997, and the years following the ban saw an increase in violent crime involving handguns. The handgun crime rate now is about the same as before the ban.
Interestingly, there are some automatic rifles that are technically legal in the UK that are illegal in the US for private citizens. Good luck getting a license for them, though. High powered non-automatic rifles and shotguns are still very much legal in the UK, there are currently over half a million valid shotgun licenses alone in the UK. You can have been in prison for 3 years, and still get a shotgun license.
Malaysia is a pretty large exception and most people who convert away from Islam are not allowed to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Malaysia#Conversion_from_Islam
Conversion from Islam
Muslims who wish to convert from Islam face severe obstacles. For Muslims, particularly ethnic Malays, the right to leave the Islamic faith and adhere to another religion is a controversial question. The legal process of conversion is also unclear; in practice it is very difficult for Muslims to change their religion legally.[22]
In 1999 the High Court ruled that secular courts have no jurisdiction to hear applications by Muslims to change religions. According to the ruling, the religious conversion of Muslims lies solely within the jurisdiction of Islamic courts.
The issue of Muslim apostasy is very sensitive. In 1998 after a controversial incident of attempted conversion, the Government stated that apostates (i.e., Muslims who wish to leave or have left Islam for another religion) would not face government punishment so long as they did not defame Islam after their conversion. However, whether the very act of conversion was an "insult to Islam" was not clarified at the time. The Government opposes what it considers deviant interpretations of Islam, maintaining that the "deviant" groups' extreme views endanger national security. In 2005 international media attention focused on the Sky Kingdom sect whose founder Ayah Pin claimed to be God, and whose members – mostly Malays – were accordingly charged with religious "deviancy" and "humiliating Islam."[23]
article has a lot of other details about the relative lack of religious mobility and intolerance towards non Muslims -particularly Hindus
-I'm just sayin'
actually DOES result in significantly less gun violence.
That is true.
But it doens't result in less violent crime. So you're just as likely to be murdered.
Also didn't impact suicide rates at all.
So they changed the tools and circumstances around crimes, not the actual crimes. So they lost freedom and gained no security.
There were about the same number of deaths in the UK from handguns when they were legal to own 20 years ago. The estimated total number of guns, legal and illegal, held by civilians in the United Kingdom is over four million. That's one for every 15 people or so. The majority of these are legally owned.
How bout those IRA pipe bombs those are way better right? You don't need guns to cause mayhem just intent. Pipe bombs, LP Gas Bombs, pressure cooker bombs IEDs etc.... Infringing on peaceful law abiding citizens constitutional rights only screws them and for what purpose? Those that have the intent will still kill. Only now the citizens are unarmed and even less able to protect themselves and have less rights than what they started with. Super great plan. looks like you have it all figured out.
By your definition I am a bigot then because I think all religion is stupid
But it doesn't change the fact that I think everyone would be happier if they stopped believing stupid nonsense.
bigot
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
Seems to fit to me. I can see now that you're a true believer. True believers frighten me very much, be they theists or atheists; anyone who is convinced that he has all the answers and those who disagree clearly aren't as enlightened as he is. You have closed your mind to the viewpoint of those who could add much needed perspective and diversity of opinion to your worldview. It would be laughable if the consequences weren't so often deadly.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
But the fact remains that without the US invasion the unrest and deaths would very likely not have happened.
The mass graves of the Saddam regime indicate that deaths were already occurring.
Why do moderate muslims always have to appologize for and/or condemn extremists. Are you an American? If so can I ask you to condemn Glenn Beck whenever he says something crazy?
When Beck picks up a gun or bomb rather than a microphone I'll gladly condemn him. To fail to do so because he is an American or a Christian would make me part of his crime by tolerating him by remaining silent.
The historical fact is that extremist ideologies occur periodically in the region. However the moderates have, over and over, stamped it out themselves. The radical interpretation of Islam proposed by these extremists were (are) considered heretical by the majority. Moderates used to preach against these heresies. Moderates used to stop these extremists. They need to do so again.
Aside from the fact that they were 3, since when do we count gunmen in pairs?
Bombing them would actually advance them to somewhere near the modern age
Yes - all three religions come from the similar root, and are considered to be "Abrahamic faiths". The main differences are whom you consider to be a prophet, what books and teachings from those prophets that you include, and whether or not you believe that Jesus is the Son of God.
It's like an Open Source project with lots of forks and variances in what libraries its creators and maintainers chose to include, and everyone insisting that their version is the One True Answer.
They bombed the London Tube for Allah...
"Allah" is just Arabic for "God". (Literally "The God" i.e. the one, the only, monotheist deity.) Christians who speak Arabic use the same word for the Christian deity - which Muslims recognize as the same entity. The word has the same root as Yahweh, Jehova, JHVH.
Interestingly, Muslims explicitly recognize Christians and Jews as "People of The Book", and the Torah and the Bible as explicitly their people's version of a heavenly-mandated collection of the genuine revealed word of God - though allegedly corrupted by time and translations. They claim there are many such books, but these two they explicitly recognize as valid instances.
They also explicitly recognize Jesus ("Issa") as a prophet (their second highest ranking one, if I have this right), Mary as their only known female prophet, and include the Second Coming in their end-times predictions. ("Prophet" is defined as someone who receives messages from God, directly or via heavenly messenger.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
They were restricted prior to the ban, in similar ways that the current guns are restricted now. I personally knew someone who I went airgun shooting with who had his guns in a normal house in a normal suburb.
You weren't allowed to carry, that was always a difference.
lol..
That would have a lot to do with being within arms reach of each other and not needing years of skill to be effective more than anything else. Firearms allow more strategy rather than limits due to attrition. But they are not particularly more deadly.
BTW, two of the bloodiest battles in history, The battle of Leipzig and The Battle of Cannae, where fought primarily with blade weapons. Firearms were present and used in Leipzig but the type and nature of them caused a lot of reliance on blade weapons. The second and third most deadly wars in history measured by total death toll was also fought with blade weapons.
The New Living Translation at Romans 1:32 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1%3A24-32&version=NIV;NASB;MSG;NLT) says "They know God’s justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too." which is quite different to your quote. The NLT is a non-direct translation, one of the looser ones, written in more modern language. You should always use several translations if you're not going to study in depth the original texts.
You also break at 1:32, in the original there was no break there the following point is key, Paul writes that we shouldn't be so quick to judge those we perceive as offending God as we too are really amongst that number - nonetheless God will judge all mercifully and according to the good they have done. See Romans 2, https://www.biblegateway.com/p....
However you do get to the heart of Jesus message here - his message is that whilst we all have sinned, we all have done things that offend God's order and all are worthy to die and so cease to be INSTEAD Jesus has sacrificed himself and paid the price that we all can turn from sin and be saved through him, restoring our relationship with God, and ultimately being with God for eternity in heaven.
Presumably your intention was to show that Christianity allows killing, yet none of your citations relate bar one and that one goes quite contrary to your apparent position.
Um, show be some data on "Handguns were banned in 1997, and the years following the ban saw an increase in violent crime involving handguns. The handgun crime rate now is about the same as before the ban."
I dunno. I would, even if I was a hippie treehugger creative type. There was a fatwa on their head. That means a dude with a Kalashnikov would eventually come. So instead of filming from their cell phone, the person who filmed how the policeman was executed in cold blood could open fire. This was in broad daylight, and buildings were full of people. I would totally fuck them up if I had my gun on me in that situation.
Actually no, they did not: http://hotair.com/archives/201...
Your snippet is too short to give context. Romans 1:18-32 should be followed by Romans 2 for context. It was a letter, and meant to be read in its entirety.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers
Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
Romans 2:
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.
And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
For there is no respect of persons with God.
For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean
The brains of a chicken, coupled with the claws of two eagles, may well hatch the eggs of our destruction.
What else do you think they'd do? The ones that ain't as stupid as ISIS! The OIC had previously condemned Denmark for allowing the Danish cartoons, and it's inconceivable that they're not happy at this. They however know that it would be suicidal to openly express joy at this, so they issue the standard template condemnation
Automatic weapons are available for legal ownership in the US with a special permit.
Last time I checked in the south of America, if quasi-legal acquisition was your goal, you could get them pretty easily if money was no object.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
I used to believe in this attempted dichotomy of Islam & Muslims at one time. Not any more. It's important to recognize that one is a thread b'cos of the other.
After all, what is Islam? It's the beliefs as laid out by their texts - the qur'an, hadiths, siras and so on. But how dangerous is it? It would have depended on how many follow it. After all, how dangerous were the Branch Davidians? Not very, since there were something like close to 100 people ultimately killed. Their doctrines were as vile as Islam.
Now, why do we bother, or worry about Islam at all? Would we have done so if it was only followed by a few 100 people in Mecca and Medina? Not likely. The reason we worry about it is that Islam is the kernel of terror campaigns throughout the Islamic empire - from Senegal to Brunei, as well as Jihadi campaigns against countries on its frontiers - Philippines, Thailand, India, Israel, South Sudan, Europe, Australia, Canada and US. Reason for that capability? It has a rich recruiting ground from 1.5 billion Muzzies worldwide. Spanning across races, continents and linguistic groups.
So if Jihadis need white guys to pull off their terror campaigns, in addition to willing dupes in the West like Richard Reid or Jose Padilla, they can easily draw recruits from Chechens, Bosnaiks, Albanians and Tatars. If they need to pull off something in India, they can send in Urdu or Bengali speaking Jihadis from Pakistan or Bangladesh. If they want to pull off something in Israel, Arabs have enough ethnic similarities. Similarly in Philippines or Thailand. Bottom line - when there are 1.5B Muzzies, any percentage of them being Jihadis is enough of a legitimate cause for worry.
If most Muslims did not follow Islam, there would be nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, most do. Just pick out the Indian subcontinent and the East Indies for starters, and you have it. Then watch those numbers get reinforced by Arabs and Turks, and you have a real problem on your hands.
I'm not opposed to insults of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism et al, but in this instance, I see no reason for any religion other than Islam to be insulted. Christian/Jewish/Hindu/Buddhist fanatics didn't murder the Charlie Hebdo staff: Muslims did! So why should other religions 'pay the price'?
and what gives christians the 'right' to ignore the first word of god (many think that both bibles are the word of god. I certainly don't, but lets assume you do).
I never understood how you can rationalize a god who is perfect, makes up laws and rules for us to live by and then, some guy comes along much much later, says 'its all changed' and we are supposed to accept that?
an infallable god that needed a v2.0 update? REALLY?
even staying with the OT, god once was angry at mankind, flooded us and then 'promised not to fuck us up again like that'. real insightful and wise god, you guys got there.
and then, we have a god who makes man, certainly should KNOW what man is capable of, and then gets all pissed off when eve uses her humanity and questions shit and wants to learn stuff.
yeah, real smart god you guys have.
I never understood how a logical mind can accept this BS.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
mother theresa WAS a piece of 'work' (and I don't mean that in a good way). she encouraged the poor to suffer.
how fucked up is THAT? I see no compassion there!
'my way or the highway' was her attitude.
fuck that!!!
she's no saint.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
I blame system-d.
system-d has angered god and we're now all paying for our software sins.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Maybe we have a history of not much over here, but we've got hundreds and hundreds of years more of not much than our american cousins... :-D
Spot on. We're seeing this in Sweden as well. It's too bad that only Sveriges Demokraterna (the Sweden Democrats, right-wingers) seem willing to talk about it. Most of the other parties are in complete denial about the time bomb they've got ticking away here, which is why the SD scored well enough in the last elections to turn things upside down in the Riksdag.
It's not so bad here in Stockholm, but many smaller cities have enclaves that are turning into ghettoes.
See the photo in this story? That's in Eskilstuna, a factory town about 100 km west of here. The mosque is on the ground floor of this building.
I spent a good part of October and November staying in a flat in this building, immediately above the mosque. Several big-city blocks of flats filled about 90% with East Asians and Pakistanis, out in the middle of Nordic small-town Nowhere. It's bizodd.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
- They don't have handguns so they butchered 1000s of people with a knife, how about you include that in your comparison, not just "deaths from handguns"?
- Ethnic composition of the two countries is not the same. UK is in Europe while US has peoples from all over the world, and trust me it is not the former Europeans who drive murder statistics here. In fact, looking at charts that consider more than ffffffffffwhole two points of data you can observe that US is clearly an outlier:
oh look there is a negative correlation between guns and murders
and US is OUT THERE
.....that just ordered the mass execution of a couple hundred protestors? The one propped up by the USG? The same USG that overthrew Gaddafi and is trying to overthrow Assad for "killing their own people"?
Is that before or after Christianist Americans have a revolution in thought conducting world wide kidnapping and torture programs, continuing to hold prisoners in gulags that have been cleared for release? It takes a few supertankers of willful dumfuckery to throw stones from that glass house.
Your couch is more likely to kill you than a terrorist, bedwetter. Your threat assessment is about as good as a biker who insists on riding without a helmet but refuses to fly on a plane "because it might crash."
I thoought the title of the previous post would lead people to google it. Nonetheless here is an example among others :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
OK, I'll bite.
/. because many of us make a living in the communication business.
This matters doubly to
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
"When was the last time you heard of such rules being enforced?"
Pretty much every week if you bother to read anything other than Western oriented news. What do you think Joseph Kony and his Lord's Resistance Army are all about exactly? What do you think the Lord bit in their name is referring to specifically? When they butcher entire villages what do you believe their reasoning to be?
Do you use double standards and assume they're just a violent bunch of people and dismiss their claimed cause and not treat ISIS the same way? or were you simply unaware that there are groups as bad as ISIS out there that claim Christianity as their cause exactly as ISIS does?
As for honour killings, I suggest you take a long hard look at many of the drug cartels in Mexico who purport to follow Christianity and claim that as their reason for doing some of the horrific things they do.
It's easy to forget there's a world outside the middle east when that and people who or whose families originate from there are all your media talking about, but in Burma even the famed for peace Buddhists have been carrying out brutal violent massacres - ironically against Rohingya muslims.
Finding examples of violence amongst a specific group is typical as easy as pinpointing the places that group inhabits, and then subsequently looking at all the places within those areas where there is extreme poverty.
We were pretty nifty with bows and arrows, back in the olden days.
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
thanks, and fair point. i guess it's less the fact that it's listed/mentioned, and more the insanity of much of the dialog that's frustrating.
I'm sure you and Charlton are having a lovely time together, but if you could just lift your head up from his lap a moment, and put your hands on the keyboard instead of his nether regions, you could the search for the UK's murder statistics. If you did that, you would learn (I know, you wouldn't really, as learning require openness to data, but bear with my figure of speech anyway) that fewer than 700 UK citizens were murdered last year, which rather gives the lie to your excitable little notion that we are being butchered in our thousands.
The British population is about 60m, so about a fifth of the U.S. population. But the U.S. has about 14,000 murders annually. Now, maths may not be your strong point, but let me give you a hint: that's slightly more than five times the UK murder number. In fact, would you know it, it's actually more than twenty times the UK murder number.
Ok, you can carry on fondling now. Enjoy!
I don't identify as an atheist or agnostic. Non-religious is more appropriate since I really don't give a shit about religion or whether cosmic sky daddies exist.
I don't care how you identify. Your smug sense of superiority tells me all that I need to know.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
This is such an inane response that I don't know where to start. Islam is very much the cause of this. Islamic laws dictate that their founder should not be depicted by anyone. It also authorizes murder to enforce such rules. Everyone else in the world recognizes that non-adherents aren't bound by the same restrictions that they are. Muslims are the exceptions. They require everybody to follow Islamic law. That's why you have incidents in MN of Muslims refusing to ring up pork in grocery stores, cabdrivers refusing to allow dogs into their cabs, even for aiding blind people, and so on. And here, you have a bunch of Muslims cold bloodedly murdering 12 people, and you suggest that their sensibilities should be respected? Cowards like you are the reason that Muzzies have advanced as far as they have.
i didnt say i was opposed to bans, simply that just because X is banned, is not going to stop a madman from doing X
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
I've always found it fascinating that Christians in the US, who supposedly are all about Jesus, blindly support Judaism which says point blank: Jesus wasn't the messiah, yet they are so vocally opposed to Islam which says that Jesus was a prophet of God. I chalk it down to ignorance, stupidity... or both.
logic has no place in religion.
the south? hell NYC you can grab a fully auto modified AR for a few hundred bucks. its not that big a deal
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
This is a good example (warning, pdf). See table 2, which shows that handgun offences were at 2648 in 1997, the year they were banned, and had risen to 5874 by 2001/2.
There isn't any evidence to show that handgun crime fell or stayed the same after the ban, because it didn't, it more than doubled in 5 years.
Warlord and drug cartel behavior is hardly equivalent to the actions of a somewhat "normal" father or brother who commits an "honor killing". You comparison utterly fails.
Fucking Crusades, Inquisitions, and burning witches are evil and all, and nothing I hate more than pedo Catholic priests. All religion is at the core of a whole lot of death and destruction.
But flying airplanes into buildings is somehow the equivalent of perverted sex??
It's the religion of peace, right up to the time they lop your head off. I have no doubt that they will take as much leeway, and kill as many infidels as we allow them to.
The mistake we made was to get involved in that neck of the woods in the first place. Nothing we will do will ever stop them from killing each other, and now us. It's how they express themselves, and they only hold grudges forever. Better we left them to the practice of their religion and ignore them. Now we are just sucked into their vortex of eternal war, and the tit for tat continuum.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Mother Theresa was a closeted atheist:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/d...
Christopher Hitchens certainly hated her.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Let's hear it for religion. Again.
Yeah, Mother Theresa was pretty vile.
Yes she was. Hitchens said it best:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
i guess im still relatively new enough to not realize that this comment was cliche, so apologies for that (i guess) but i still fail to see why this is 'stuff that matters'.
So you have a very narrow view of what matters?
As long as I've been here, the ability of people to speak their mind without kooks killing them has been an important part of Slashdot. Strong independent streak in many of us.
And here's the really cool part. You are allowed to think it's irrelevant to our purposes., and we can discuss back with you.
But you do end up taking a lot of flak when you try to determine for us what we can discuss. Slashdot is not only programmers, and programmers also do more than program. Some times we even come out of our mom's basements.
Kinda cool in the then. Sit back, relax and have an adult beverage of your choice, and make fun of people. If you want to.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
You're discounting range. A pen might be mightier than a sword, but its range sucks compared to a gun.
Now if a few people had flung chairs, books, hot coffee, etc. (basically anything heavy enough to do a little damage/distraction) they could undoubtedly have then rushed the gunmen with fewer losses than occurred from sitting there waiting for their name to be called.
go through old posts much? who's the troll again?
not really sure what cool adult beverage you are drinking 'in the then', but i thought 'stuff that matters' should be pertaining to the community... had *hoped*on a slightly differentiated basis. people being allowed to speak their mind without kooks killing them is not 'part of slashdot' so much as it's part of (pretty much everywhere?) in the common-sense world last i checked. sorry if you thought this was some unique home for you.
and if you think believing what is told to you by the 'news' is indicative of an 'independent streak;, well then, whatever beer you're drinking sure is potent shit.
Doesn't Eric Holder, et al, provide guns to criminal types?
-- "I'm not in a hurry; I'm in Hawaii." The Homeless Guy
Religious violence is a widespread problem, and it's ethnocentric bigotry to suggest that Islam is somehow guilty of some moral corruption that is unique to that religion.
Since you are content to base your beliefs on blind prejudice and assumptions based on what you hear in the news, rather than doing some actual research, I've taken the liberty of spoon-feeding you some summaries of recent terrorist actions by Christians.
Here's some stuff, from the link I already provided:
Hindus in India
The Baptist Church of Tripura is alleged to have supplied the NLFT with arms and financial support and to have encouraged the murder of Hindus, particularly infants, as a means to depopulate the region of all Hindus.[28] In 2009, the Assam Times reported that about fifteen armed Hmar militants, members of Manmasi National Christian Army, tried to force Hindu residents of Bhuvan Pahar, Assam to convert to Christianity.[29] A few Christian evangelists in India have been accused of forced conversion of Hindus, and some of them have been for allegedly converting others by force.[30][31]
North America
The government paid religious societies to provide education to Native American children on reservations. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) founded additional American Indian boarding schools based on the assimilation model of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School.
Children were usually immersed in European-American culture through appearance changes with haircuts, were forbidden to speak their native languages, and traditional names were replaced by new European-American names. The experience of the schools was often harsh, especially for the younger children who were separated from their families. In numerous ways, they were encouraged or forced to abandon their Native American identities and cultures.[17] The number of Native American children in the boarding schools reached a peak in the 1970s, with an estimated enrollment of 60,000 in 1973. Especially through investigations of the later twentieth century, there have been many documented cases of sexual, physical and mental abuse occurring at such schools.[18][19] Since those years, tribal nations have increasingly insisted on community-based schools and have also founded numerous tribally controlled colleges. Community schools have also been supported by the federal government through the BIA and legislation. The largest boarding schools have closed. In some cases, reservations or tribes were too small or poor to support independent schools and still wanted an alternative for their children, especially for high school. By 2007, the number of Native American children in boarding schools had declined to 9,500.
Here's some stuff from another article on a related topic:
Sabra and Shatila massacre
Maronite Christian militias perpetrated the Karantina and Tel al-Zaatar massacres of Palestinians and Lebanese Muslims during Lebanon's 1975–1990 civil war. The 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre, which targeted unarmed Palestinian refugees for rape and murder, was considered to be genocide by the United Nations General Assembly.[44] A British photographer present during the incident said that "People who committed the acts of murder that I saw that day were wearing [crucifixes] and were calling themselves Christians."[45] After the end of the civil war, Christian militias refused to disband, concentrating in the Israeli-occupied south of the country, where they terrorized Muslim and Druze villages and forcefully recruited men and boys from those communities into their groups.[46]
Utøya Island killings
In July 2011, Anders Behring Breivik was arrested and charged with terrorism after a car bombing in Oslo and a mass shooting on Utøya island that killed 77 people. Hours prior to the events, Breivik released a 1,500-page manifesto detailing his beliefs that immigrants were unde
People do commit violence and terrorist acts in the name of Jesus Christ. The KKK is a notable example of this.
Here are just a few recent examples of terrorist acts committed by Christians for religious reasons that I was able to find with very little research:
Sabra and Shatila massacre
Maronite Christian militias perpetrated the Karantina and Tel al-Zaatar massacres of Palestinians and Lebanese Muslims during Lebanon's 1975–1990 civil war. The 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre, which targeted unarmed Palestinian refugees for rape and murder, was considered to be genocide by the United Nations General Assembly.[44] A British photographer present during the incident said that "People who committed the acts of murder that I saw that day were wearing [crucifixes] and were calling themselves Christians."[45] After the end of the civil war, Christian militias refused to disband, concentrating in the Israeli-occupied south of the country, where they terrorized Muslim and Druze villages and forcefully recruited men and boys from those communities into their groups.[46]
Utøya Island killings
In July 2011, Anders Behring Breivik was arrested and charged with terrorism after a car bombing in Oslo and a mass shooting on Utøya island that killed 77 people. Hours prior to the events, Breivik released a 1,500-page manifesto detailing his beliefs that immigrants were undermining Norway's traditional Christian values, and identifying himself as a "Christian crusader" while describing himself as not very religious.[73][74] Although initial news reports described him as a Christian fundamentalist,[75][76] subsequent analyses of his motivations have noted that he did not only display Christian terrorist inclinations, but also had non-religious, right-wing beliefs.[77][78] Mark Juergensmeyer and John Mark Reynolds have stated that the events were Christian terrorism,[79][80] whereas Brad Hirschfield has rejected the Christian terrorist label.[81]
Lord's Resistance Army
The Lord's Resistance Army, a cult and guerrilla army, was engaged in an armed rebellion against the Ugandan government in 2005. It has been accused of using child soldiers and of committing numerous crimes against humanity; including massacres, abductions, mutilation, torture, rape, and using forced child labourers as soldiers, porters, and sex slaves.[82] A quasi-religious movement that mixes some aspects of Christian beliefs with its own brand of spiritualism,[83][84] it is led by Joseph Kony, who proclaims himself the spokesperson of God and a spirit medium, primarily of the "Holy Spirit" which the Acholi believe can represent itself in many manifestations.[85][85][86][87] LRA fighters wear rosary beads and recite passages from the Bible before battle.[83][88][89][90][91][92]
Christian Identity and anti-abortion killings
After 1981, members of groups such as the Army of God began attacking abortion clinics and doctors across the United States.[93][94][95] A number of terrorist attacks were attributed by Bruce Hoffman to individuals and groups with ties to the Christian Identity and Christian Patriot movements, including the Lambs of Christ.[96] A group called Concerned Christians was deported from Israel on suspicion of planning to attack holy sites in Jerusalem at the end of 1999; they believed that their deaths would "lead them to heaven".[97][98]
The motive for anti-abortionist Scott Roeder murdering Wichita doctor George Tiller on 31 May 2009 was the belief that abortion is not only immoral, but also a form of murder under "God's law", irrespective of "man's law" in any country, and that this belief went "hand in hand" with his religious beliefs.[99][100] The group supporting Roeder proclaimed that any force is "legitimate to protect the life of an unborn child", and called on all Christians to "rise up" and "take action" against threats to Christianity and to unborn life.[101] Eric Robert Rud
go through old posts much? who's the troll again?
Don't like the Friendly approach? K.
Fuck you. I don't give a fuck if you think it's an appropriate story or not. Stories get posted on Slashdot because people go over them, and decide if they are interesting or not.
I'm interested in the story, and given the number of comments, a lot of other people are too. If you want a website that only has news you deem appropriate, well hosting is cheap these days.
Life's too short to demand others act as you want them to act That's how this terrorist shit starts
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
well, that veneer was quite thin! actually lol. that's how this terrorist shit starts? priceless dude. thanks for that. made my day
The politically correct crowd don't get it. They refuse to see it as they seem to believe in this brotherhood of man/kumbahyah bullshit. The Muslims in Sydney and Melbourne also have their sharia patrols which are illegal but does anyone stop them?
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
Early Christians, including prominent Church Fathers, disagreed. For example, here's St John Chrysostom (ironically, a patron saint of preachers), 4th century:
"I desire to ask one favor of you all, in return for this my address, and speaking with you; which is, that you will correct on my behalf the blasphemers of this city. And should you hear any one in the public thoroughfare, or in the midst of the forum, blaspheming God; go up to him and rebuke him; and should it be necessary to inflict blows, spare not to do so. Smite him on the face; strike his mouth; sanctify your hand with the blow, and if any should accuse you, and drag you to the place of justice, follow them thither; and when the judge on the bench calls you to account, say boldly that the man blasphemed the King of angels! For if it be necessary to punish those who blaspheme an earthly king, much more so those who insult God."
I think I'll trust these guys on the meaning of OT vs NT more so than the current flock. At least they were much closer to the purported source.
Well, there is a cellphone video that records over 40 seconds of terrorists running around, and gunning down at least one person in the process. If the person holding that cellphone was holding a gun instead - any gun! - they could have made at least one well-aimed and hopefully effective shot in those 40 seconds without exposing themselves.
A gun is obviously not a magic thing that preserve you from any violence, but it's just as silly to pretend that it cannot be helpful at all in a situation like that.
As the events in Paris have demonstrated, the cost of a free speech (and a free society in general) is eternal vigilance. There is a war, and you are a combatant whether you want it or not, simply on account of having expressed an opinion some find disagreeable. There's nothing the society as a whole can do about this without compromising its core freedoms, but the individuals constituting that society can and should be aware of the fact, and make the necessary arrangements.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... VERSUS https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Casteism
Anyone who murders their child is not "normal". There is evidence of Patricide in every walk of life.
actually DOES result in significantly less gun violence.
Well, as long as people are only getting stabbed or bludgeoned, all is well then, right?
Yea, Just a metric fuck ton of stabbings, they're now trying to ban kitchen knives,
The OT poses a problem only if you insist that a father that educated a toddler shouting NO! should keep educating a grownup by doing exactly the same. Or if you insist that books written about the hypothetical WHO beyond creation should spend time detailing HOW things got formed, possibly matching the way scientists describe the universe from the inside of it (which currently can't explain 95% of stuff without introducing dark matter/energy, multiverse, bubbles where anomalies are occurring...)
For some of believers, these are not problems, the books describe a relationship man/hypothetical God. Maybe you wanted the Sutra instead?
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Opinions of early church fathers do not have the standing of the teachings of Christ. Again, Christ actively interfered with a "lawful" stoning.
That said, an early church father advocating punching someone in the mouth is very far from stoning someone to death.
Seeing how Christ is not around in person and we cannot ask him what he thinks, all we have are opinions of various people on what his teachings actually are. I don't see why I should take, say, yours to be more authoritative than someone who was widely considered to be one of the model Christians of his time, and who is 1700 years closer to Christ than we are.
This particular case was just an example, of course. There are many others. Saint Theodosia of Constantinople, for example was canonized specifically for the act of killing a soldier who was desecrating an icon, so clearly the Church (at least, Orthodox and Catholic ones) approves of answering blasphemy with lethal violence. This is from the 8th century. For another example, Thomas Aquinas, held in very high regard by Catholics to this day, had eloquently argued that death penalty is a just and necessary punishment for heresy.
Christ is not here but many of his teaching are with us. And as I said his actively interfering with a "lawful" stoning is among those lessons. The lesson was clear. Killing for old testament law violations is wrong.
Now please continue making us laugh by arguing that Christ's teachings and examples don't constitute christian beliefs.
Who said anything about OT violations? Neither Chrysostom nor Aquinas justified their support for corporal and capital punishment for religious crimes based on OT.
Who said anything about OT violations? Neither Chrysostom nor Aquinas justified their support for corporal and capital punishment for religious crimes based on OT.
See older posts. OT violations leading to death and other severe penalties are the topic.
Well, apparently, you don't need to invoke OT to come up with the idea of death penalties in such within the framework of Christianity. So it would seem that the exclusive focus on OT is unwarranted.
Well, apparently, you don't need to invoke OT to come up with the idea of death penalties in such within the framework of Christianity. So it would seem that the exclusive focus on OT is unwarranted.
The post I responded to listed various OT laws with death and other extreme punishments as evidence of Christian capital crimes.
Other than self defense and "just wars" Christianity does not permit killing. There are no approved death penalties for any crimes. Now had their been murderous crimes committed in the past, yes, by those with heretical beliefs seeking/maintaining the power of the state, not by those practicing the teaching of Christ.
dude, the perps in Paris said they were there to avenge the fact that the targeted publishers had been poking fun at Mohammed (a dead man). Did I use a ridiculous analogy? Sure, but is it really any more ridiculous than what really happened?
Exactly how am I misunderstanding the "here and now" reality of what happened in Paris? Or are you suggesting that I should not have attempted to discuss what happened in Paris because it was in the (very recent) past? How is that any different than you discussing my post that was also in the very recent past?
and what does 9/11 have to do with the recent happenings in Paris? Are you actually saying that the shootings didn't happen? Or that the two shooters were really CIA (or similar) agents pretending to be Islamic nutjobs? Please do tell.
What really blows my mind is that you are more willing to believe that such massive conspiracies involving thousands of people can actually be kept secret.
If I were to call Hindus in this manner:
- those in whose religion old men marry little girls (and many of them: polygamy was common in Hinduism â" and is practiced even today)
- those in whose religion Dalits are not just shunned but regularly killed
- those in whose religion women are BURNT ALIVE along with their husbands
- those in whose religion widows are treated with UTMOST CRUELTY (have you seen Water?)
- those in whose religion marriage to another caste will lead to death by stoning in a village assembly
- those in whose religion the village 'boss' sleeps with the wife of EVERY newly married person (this STILL happens in many UP villages) [Proof]
then would that help?
http://www.sabhlokcity.com/201...
Casteism
Christians? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Christians? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Casteism
...because WW1 and WW2 was really all about enforcing christianity.
_SO_ NOT.
Exactly. It's about
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... VERSUS https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Casteism
I'm ignoring you from now on because you're completely clueless at least about EU history.
WW1 was actually caused by stress about the balance of political power between the "Great Power" countries (i.e. the majority) in Europe.
WW2 was directly caused by Germany invading Poland, a result of the rise of the Nazi party (who were elected by a majority coalition).
I'm ignoring you from now on because you're living in a world devoid of reality.
Casteism
Would I be correct to assume I'm seeing evidence of yet another conservative American somehow managing to raise himself momentarily up from the fetid swamp of willful ignorance and blind, vacuous stupidity that is his home to excrete more evidence of the decline of a once-proud nation onto the public stage?
Dude, you should just post a link to a YouTube video of a dog having a dump and save everybody time.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.