Terrorist Assaults on France (Jan 2015) - Charlie Hebdo, Executed Police, Gun Fights and Hostage Tak

[The Bread Guy]

Why?  Nobody hesitates to call Westboro Baptist Church a bunch of Christian extremist nutjobs, because that's what they are.

But how many folks complain about Christians not condemning the Westboro folks more?  And how many say Christianity as a religion should be condemned because of the acts of the Westboro-ites?

Meanwhile, the "they're not just killing infidels" meme continues ....

It was a Muslim policeman from a local police station who was “slaughtered like a dog” after heroically attempting to stop two heavily armed killers from fleeing the offices of Charlie Hebdo following their brutal massacre.

Tributes to police officer Ahmed Merabet poured in on Thursday after images of his murder at point blank range by a Kalashnikov-wielding masked terrorist circulated around the world.

Merabet, who according to officials was 40, was called to the scene while on patrol with a female colleague in the neighbourhood, just in time to see the black Citroën used by the two killers heading towards the boulevard from Charlie Hebdo.

“He was on foot, and came nose to nose with the terrorists. He pulled out his weapon. It was his job, it was his duty,” said Rocco Contento, a colleague who was a union representative at the central police station for Paris’s 11th arrondissement.

Video footage which has now been pulled from the internet showed the two gunmen get out of the car before one shot the policeman in the groin. As he falls to the pavement groaning in pain and holding up an arm as though to protect himself, the second gunman moves forward and asks the policeman: “Do you want to kill us?” Merabet replies: “Non, ç’est bon, chef” (“No, it’s OK mate”). The terrorist then shoots him in the head ....

#IAmAhmedMerabet

 

[Kat Stevens]

I don't see the disconnect here.  If I went into any place in the world and shot it up, singing "Bringing in the Sheaves" while cheerfully butchering innocents, there would be no hesitation to call me a radical Christian terrorist.  The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists, given, but it sure as hell seems that the vast majority of terrorists are Muslims. Or are we afraid of being offensive (I despise that f***ing word)?  A group of Muslims commit a terror act.  They are, by definition, "Muslim terrorists", no?

 

[The Bread Guy]

A group of Muslims commit a terror act.  They are, by definition, "Muslim terrorists", no?

Yes.  I should have been clearer that I was being the devil's advocate, showing how some folk treat pretty bad behaviour by small groups of people attributed to an identifiable religion - sorry for any misunderstanding.

 

[Remius]

I don't see the disconnect here.  If I went into any place in the world and shot it up, singing "Bringing in the Sheaves" while cheerfully butchering innocents, there would be no hesitation to call me a radical Christian terrorist.  The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists, given, but it sure as hell seems that the vast majority of terrorists are Muslims. Or are we afraid of being offensive (I despise that f***ing word)?  A group of Muslims commit a terror act.  They are, by definition, "Muslim terrorists", no?

I'm not so sure.  Provided here for some persepective and info is a list of Christian terrorist groups and such.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

When abortion clinics were targetted and when doctors performing abortion were being assasinated I don't recall too much talk about christian terrorists.  Anti-abortion terrorists sure but rarely ever christian terrorists.  Same with the Klan.  While various groups follow the same ideology we call them right wing extremists or neo nazis despite them all being predominatly christian.  If we follow your definition then a group of Christians commiting a terror act by definition is a "Christian terrorist" but we rarely use that term.  You'll notice what term the PM is using to describe these punks.  "Jihadist Terrorists" not "Muslim terrorists"

Anyways sorry for the derail.

 

[cryco]

yes, the same way that a group of cyclists commit a terror act, they are cyclist terrorists. I know what you're saying and I have no problems saying that most terrorists stem from the muslim faith, but when they commit these acts in the name of islam, they become extremist criminals, ie mass murderers, not muslim terrorists in my eyes.
Just like the westboro baptists, the moment they bash gays, cross the line from Christianity into racism.

Although, I must add, i have seen some videos and read enough stories to suggest that Islam is very prone to intolerant interpretation which is more widespread than I care for.

 

[Remius]

yes, the same way that a group of cyclists commit a terror act, they are cyclist terrorists. I know what you're saying and I have no problems saying that most terrorists stem from the muslim faith, but when they commit these acts in the name of islam, they become extremist criminals, ie mass murderers, not muslim terrorists in my eyes.
Just like the westboro baptists, the moment they bash gays, cross the line from Christianity into racism.

Although, I must add, i have seen some videos and read enough stories to suggest that Islam is very prone to intolerant interpretation which is more widespread than I care for.

I suppose it depends on what areas of the world we are talking about.  Do most terrorists stem from the muslim faith?  I'm willing to bet a dollar to a donut that most terrorists in Europe at any rate, are seperatists of all sorts and likely account for the lion's share of terrorist attacks in Europe.  I'd also bet that most terrorists in the US aren't muslim either.

A counter point to this is deciding how to describe these guys.  An argument can be made that these are not just terrorists that happen to be muslim.  They are Muslims that have taken up terrorism to further their cause because they are in fact muslim and the people they attack don't subscribe to their belief.

To me, and this has nothing to do with trying to be PC or what not, Jihadist terrorists or radical jihadists is more suitable and accurate.  The muslim world is huge and diverse with various sects and off shoots just like christianity, with moderates and extremists.

Neo Nazis are called extactly that and rarely called christian terrorists.  I think the same logic applies to radical Jihadies.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I suspect they self-identify as Muslims, so good enough for me, they commit a terrorist Act, therefore they are Muslim Terrorist

 

[Kat Stevens]

I suspect they self-identify as Muslims, so good enough for me, they commit a terrorist Act, therefore they are Muslim Terrorist

There ya go.  These guys do what they do in the name of whatever twisted version of Allah they subscribe to.  Westboro call themselves Baptists, the Klan call themselves Christian Knights of whatdafuk, who am I to argue with them?

 

[Marchog]

Neo Nazis are called extactly that and rarely called christian terrorists.

Neo-Nazis are rarely Christians. They are more inclined towards neo-pagan symbology, and their ideology stems from ferociously anti Judeo-Christian Nietzschean moral philosophy.

I am yet again disappointed by diversionary attempts to saddle Christianity with terrorism and/or Nazism (which at best would be a tu quoque), the likes of which seem to pop up in every Internet discussion on Islamic extremism.

Also, too soon by the Duffle Blog? http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/01/tea-party-attack-charlie-hebdo/

 

[Kat Stevens]

British Dictionary definitions for jihad
jihad
/dʒɪˈhæd/
noun
1.
(Islam) a holy war against infidels undertaken by Muslims in defence of the Islamic faith
2.
(Islam) the personal struggle of the individual believer against evil and persecution

Therefore, a "jihadist" is engaging in jihad, as described above.  Ipso facto and QED, a jihadist is acting in defence of islam, and therefore acting in the name of Islam.

 

[larry Strong]

Neo Nazis are called extactly that and rarely called christian terrorists.

Neo Nazi's - and for the record not a fan of them - don't go around doing this:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/isis-behead-street-magician-entertaining-4929838


Cheers
Larry

 

[Remius]

Neo Nazi's - and for the record not a fan of them - don't go around doing this:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/isis-behead-street-magician-entertaining-4929838


Cheers
Larry

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1098035/Filmed-beheadings-Russian-neo-Nazis-borrowing-tactics-al-Qaeda.html

Apparently some have...


At any rate I didn't mean to derail.  Just that it seems that other terrorist groups and organisations seem to be referred to by name or title but rarely by their affiliate religion or race in many cases. 

The government and the pm aren't using the term Muslim terrorists.  So it isn't surprising that some people might be exercising a certain degree of sensitivity to the Muslim community.

 

[George Wallace]

The government and the pm aren't using the term Muslim terrorists.  So it isn't surprising that some people might be exercising a certain degree of sensitivity to the Muslim community.

At the same time the Muslim communities in most Western nations are just as outspoken against this act as all other groups.  It was a Muslim policeman who was EXECUTED in that video.  ISIL does not discriminate as to whom they murder--often a Muslim Terrorist Group killing Muslims.  (Does that fit into your opinion of what a Muslim Terrorist is?)

 

[Remius]

I think the problem is that Islam more than most other religions tends to get condemned as whole for these kind of attacks.  It's no wonder that many in the muslim community would be outspoken against this act. 

How many times have we seen revenge attacks against people that have nothing to do with these kind of things other than being of the same denomination.

 

[George Wallace]

I think the problem is that Islam more than most other religions tends to get condemned as whole for these kind of attacks. 

No.  It is timing.  If this were in the days of the Spanish Inquisition we would be condemning the Catholic Church. 

Thing to remember is that there are other religious and cultural terrorist groups, mostly in India, that are not in the News as they are not on such a large scale.  The Tamils just recently were the "flavour of the month", and are now gone.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Consider the distinction between "quality" and "quantity".

People claiming to be "Christians" and "Muslims" employ terrorism in the name of Christianity or Islam ("quality").  This is usually where the moral relativism/equivalence fans end their analysis.  (eg. "The US committed war crimes during WWII; therefore, Nazis.")

Wikipedia thinks there are about 2.2B Christians and 1.8B Muslims.  Divide the number of deaths caused by terrorists claiming to act in the name of the faction for purposes supporting the faction into the respective populations ("quantity") and call the results "A" and "B".  Either a lot of Christian terrorism has gone unreported in the past couple of decades, or A << B.

BTW, the "Islam has never really been tried" line of argument (aka "those people aren't really Muslims" [or "no true Scotsman"]) isn't particularly convincing.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Why are we so afraid of these idiots anyways?  If anything they should be afraid of us!  The West could wipe these ants off the face of the planet if we really wanted to.  Jihadists should be scared of us, not the other way around.  Piss us off enough and rest assured, no quarter will be given.

This being said, this isn't about religion, it's about power.  Jihadists only use religion as a front for their quest for absolute power.  Let's not get into a pointless discussion on Islam vs Christianity.  It's ridiculous and does nothing to help the situation.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Why are we so afraid of these idiots anyways?  If anything they should be afraid of us!  The West could wipe these ants off the face of the planet if we really wanted to.  Jihadists should be scared of us, not the other way around.  Piss us off enough and rest assured, no quarter will be given.

This being said, this isn't about religion, it's about power.  Jihadists only use religion as a front for their quest for absolute power.  Let's not get into a pointless discussion on Islam vs Christianity.  It's ridiculous and does nothing to help the situation.

Democratic nations must try to find ways to starve the terrorist and the hijacker of the oxygen of publicity on which they depend.

Margaret Thatcher

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/margaretth162424.html#qI6sVTfptZWC8F5V.99

 

[midget-boyd91]

This being said, this isn't about religion, it's about power.  Jihadists only use religion as a front for their quest for absolute power.  Let's not get into a pointless discussion on Islam vs Christianity.  It's ridiculous and does nothing to help the situation.

I have to disagree on this one..... to a certain extent. I will agree that a discussion about Islam vs Christianity is ridiculous and pointless. However I believe that only the last word "Christianity" is wrong in that statement.
-Islam vs Christianity has been beaten and beaten to a bloody pulp by absolutely everybody.
-Islam vs EVERYONE ELSE however seems more appropriate. (In my opinion)

They know very well the extent of their powers. They've been unable to defeat 5 million Jews on a plot of land as small as Cape Breton Island, so I'd say it's fair to say they are aware that they KNOW they will be unable to lay claim to any measurable amount of power over the entire western world. The majority of the foreign fighters who have flown from Canada, the U.S, The U.K, France etc.. have done so because they believe in what they are fighting for. And that is an Islamic State.

A man working two jobs, struggling to support his wife and five kids in London or Edmonton does not leave his family behind to fight in Syria for the sake of power... he does so because he believes so strongly that that Islamic State is the will of (his) God.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I have to disagree on this one..... to a certain extent. I will agree that a discussion about Islam vs Christianity is ridiculous and pointless. However I believe that only the last word "Christianity" is wrong in that statement.
-Islam vs Christianity has been beaten and beaten to a bloody pulp by absolutely everybody.
-Islam vs EVERYONE ELSE however seems more appropriate. (In my opinion)

They know very well the extent of their powers. They've been unable to defeat 5 million Jews on a plot of land as small as Cape Breton Island, so I'd say it's fair to say they are aware that they KNOW they will be unable to lay claim to any measurable amount of power over the entire western world. The majority of the foreign fighters who have flown from Canada, the U.S, The U.K, France etc.. have done so because they believe in what they are fighting for. And that is an Islamic State.

A man working two jobs, struggling to support his wife and five kids in London or Edmonton does not leave his family behind to fight in Syria for the sake of power... he does so because he believes so strongly that that Islamic State is the will of (his) God.

You almost made sense until your last snippet where you totally contradicted yourself. A man who can't support himself or his family leaves to fight in a foreign war.... Hmmm sounds like a lust for power to me.  He is a dirtbag and thinks the only way he is going to make it big is if he picks up a Kalashnikov and goes to fight the good fight.  send in the armoured division and let him meet his maker I say.