Paris terror attack

[G B Young]

Teacher beheaded in the street apparently. Horrendous.

Just what we need right now. Effing nutjob.

[hibby6270]

Perpetrator apparently shot and killed by police.

[hibsbollah]

Professor who wrote about the physical portrayal of Mohammad. Fairly clear what the motivation was :rolleyes: Horrible.

[Killiehibbie]

Professor who wrote about the physical portrayal of Mohammad. Fairly clear what the motivation was :rolleyes: Horrible.

How can they get upset when nobody knows what he really looked like?

[Kato]

Professor who wrote about the physical portrayal of Mohammad. Fairly clear what the motivation was :rolleyes: Horrible.

Medieval twats.

[Sir David Gray]

Absolutely horrific that this kind of thing can still take place in the 21st century.

Why would someone do that? Apparently because of a cartoon!

[Callum_62]

Absolutely horrific that this kind of thing can still take place in the 21st century.

Why would someone do that? Apparently because of a cartoon!A cartoon that the teacher didn't even create!

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[DH1875]

Apparently the parent of one of the kids in the teachers class that done it.

[G B Young]

Apparently the parent of one of the kids in the teachers class that done it.

The killer is reported to have been 18 so it's hard to imagine that's the case. Maybe a relative though. Utter **** whoever it was.

[Moulin Yarns]

The killer is reported to have been 18 so it's hard to imagine that's the case. Maybe a relative though. Utter **** whoever it was.

Almost certainly a relative, he was chechen, and a girl in the class shown the material was also Chechen in reports.

[Keith_M]

If this is how some people see their religion (which many apparently do), then I'm sorry, but your version of that religion is not acceptable in the modern world.

[Moulin Yarns]

If this is how some people see their religion (which many apparently do), then I'm sorry, but your version of that religion is not acceptable in the modern world.

Unfortunately, when one religion attacks another religion, it is bad. But when one religion attacks the another branch of the the same religion we don't have a hope. See Northern Ireland and the west of Scotland for more information.

Christianity, who knew?!

[G B Young]

Almost certainly a relative, he was chechen, and a girl in the class shown the material was also Chechen in reports.

He had "no apparent connection to the teacher or the school" according to this. Simply a deranged extremist or a friend/relative who had been informed about the teacher and decided to take his own warped 'vengeance'? Or was he perhaps tasked to do so by someone? The number of arrests so far implies this was more than a one-man plot.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54589241

[Smartie]

Without condoning the barbaric actions of the perpetrator, what is it about people that they feel they need to make points by doing things like depicting the prophet?

It clearly antagonises people on a level that many of us don't understand.

Is it too much to ask for us to not draw certain cartoons etc?

I get freedom of expression etc but there should also be respect for different points of view and priorities.

If we were being deprived of oxygen or food or something that we require for our existence then fair enough. But surely we can acknowledge the sensitivities of the situation and just not go there?

I'm not a religious person but I have no desire whatsoever to disrespect the pope, prophets, churches, religious texts or anyone/ anything else. My rights to freedom of expression can gladly take a back seat if it means that I don't sufficiently enrage folk that they feel they need to resort to the medieval.

[Sir David Gray]

Without condoning the barbaric actions of the perpetrator, what is it about people that they feel they need to make points by doing things like depicting the prophet?

It clearly antagonises people on a level that many of us don't understand.

Is it too much to ask for us to not draw certain cartoons etc?

I get freedom of expression etc but there should also be respect for different points of view and priorities.

If we were being deprived of oxygen or food or something that we require for our existence then fair enough. But surely we can acknowledge the sensitivities of the situation and just not go there?

I'm not a religious person but I have no desire whatsoever to disrespect the pope, prophets, churches, religious texts or anyone/ anything else. My rights to freedom of expression can gladly take a back seat if it means that I don't sufficiently enrage folk that they feel they need to resort to the medieval.

In order to avoid sufficiently enraging these folk from resorting to the medieval, you would need to strictly follow the rules and teachings of Wahhabism. You would need to give up your way of life - no alcohol, no gambling, no dancing, no western music, your wives and daughters would need permission from a male to leave the house.

People can point to the depiction of Muhammad as being the provocation behind this despicable act if they want but the fact is that for Islamist extremists like this, you and I are just as much of an infidel in their eyes as the guy who was beheaded in this attack on Friday and therefore we could easily be next. These people will find different excuses to carry out these attacks. They become sufficiently enraged and resort to the medieval just by the very existence of Western culture.

[Hibrandenburg]

Without condoning the barbaric actions of the perpetrator, what is it about people that they feel they need to make points by doing things like depicting the prophet?

It clearly antagonises people on a level that many of us don't understand.

Is it too much to ask for us to not draw certain cartoons etc?

I get freedom of expression etc but there should also be respect for different points of view and priorities.

If we were being deprived of oxygen or food or something that we require for our existence then fair enough. But surely we can acknowledge the sensitivities of the situation and just not go there?

I'm not a religious person but I have no desire whatsoever to disrespect the pope, prophets, churches, religious texts or anyone/ anything else. My rights to freedom of expression can gladly take a back seat if it means that I don't sufficiently enrage folk that they feel they need to resort to the medieval.

Religion shouldn't be above scrutiny, ridicule or criticism, that would be a huge step backwards. I also don't buy the line that it's not religion at fault but some extremists within the religions. You just have to take a look at some of the passages in any of the 3 abrahamic religion's holy literature to see the barbaric potential for anyone looking for an excuse to hate.

[Callum_62]

In order to avoid sufficiently enraging these folk from resorting to the medieval, you would need to strictly follow the rules and teachings of Wahhabism. You would need to give up your way of life - no alcohol, no gambling, no dancing, no western music, your wives and daughters would need permission from a male to leave the house.

People can point to the depiction of Muhammad as being the provocation behind this despicable act if they want but the fact is that for Islamist extremists like this, you and I are just as much of an infidel in their eyes as the guy who was beheaded in this attack on Friday and therefore we could easily be next. These people will find different excuses to carry out these attacks. They become sufficiently enraged and resort to the medieval just by the very existence of Western culture.If that were the case why did he target the teacher - surley if we are all seen as just as "bad" he wouldve done something before now?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Sir David Gray]

If that were the case why did he target the teacher - surley if we are all seen as just as "bad" he wouldve done something before now?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Why?

The guy was reportedly only 18 years of age, he's got to start somewhere.

[neil7908]

Why?

The guy was reportedly only 18 years of age, he's got to start somewhere.

Agree with that. If it wasn't this there would have been some other offence taken.

[neil7908]

Without condoning the barbaric actions of the perpetrator, what is it about people that they feel they need to make points by doing things like depicting the prophet?

It clearly antagonises people on a level that many of us don't understand.

Is it too much to ask for us to not draw certain cartoons etc?

I get freedom of expression etc but there should also be respect for different points of view and priorities.

If we were being deprived of oxygen or food or something that we require for our existence then fair enough. But surely we can acknowledge the sensitivities of the situation and just not go there?

I'm not a religious person but I have no desire whatsoever to disrespect the pope, prophets, churches, religious texts or anyone/ anything else. My rights to freedom of expression can gladly take a back seat if it means that I don't sufficiently enrage folk that they feel they need to resort to the medieval.

Whilst I kinda get what you are saying, we are then in danger of wide-spread censorship or declaring certain areas of satire off limits.

Should we ban Life of Brian - that upset huge numbers of Christians? There's a danger here in encouraging other extremists by in essence giving into demands as well.

As per the post above, the guy that did this was waiting for for something to set him off. Before Charlie Hebdo there was the Iraq War, before that 9/11 was justified by American military presence in Saudi Arabia etc.

There will always be something.

[Keith_M]

Without condoning the barbaric actions of the perpetrator, what is it about people that they feel they need to make points by doing things like depicting the prophet?

It clearly antagonises people on a level that many of us don't understand.

Is it too much to ask for us to not draw certain cartoons etc?

I get freedom of expression etc but there should also be respect for different points of view and priorities.

If we were being deprived of oxygen or food or something that we require for our existence then fair enough. But surely we can acknowledge the sensitivities of the situation and just not go there?

I'm not a religious person but I have no desire whatsoever to disrespect the pope, prophets, churches, religious texts or anyone/ anything else. My rights to freedom of expression can gladly take a back seat if it means that I don't sufficiently enrage folk that they feel they need to resort to the medieval.



I'm not sure I agree with a full 'freedom of expression'. That can be abused by people that are just determined to insult or antagonise others.

I think, though, that in any modern, civilised society, there needs to be an acceptance that it's up to a court of law to decide if something has gone too far.

If any religious groups (or sub-groups) can't accept that, then they don't really belong in a modern, civilised society.

[G B Young]

Without condoning the barbaric actions of the perpetrator, what is it about people that they feel they need to make points by doing things like depicting the prophet?

It clearly antagonises people on a level that many of us don't understand.

Is it too much to ask for us to not draw certain cartoons etc?

I get freedom of expression etc but there should also be respect for different points of view and priorities.

If we were being deprived of oxygen or food or something that we require for our existence then fair enough. But surely we can acknowledge the sensitivities of the situation and just not go there?

I'm not a religious person but I have no desire whatsoever to disrespect the pope, prophets, churches, religious texts or anyone/ anything else. My rights to freedom of expression can gladly take a back seat if it means that I don't sufficiently enrage folk that they feel they need to resort to the medieval.

I don't think we know enough about this particular situation to imply that the teacher didn't respect different points of view. He appeared to have been a very experienced, well respected member of his profession and from what I've read he was attempting to present a balanced narrative. Unlike the unbalanced nutter who saw fit to behead him for it.

[Smartie]

In order to avoid sufficiently enraging these folk from resorting to the medieval, you would need to strictly follow the rules and teachings of Wahhabism. You would need to give up your way of life - no alcohol, no gambling, no dancing, no western music, your wives and daughters would need permission from a male to leave the house.

People can point to the depiction of Muhammad as being the provocation behind this despicable act if they want but the fact is that for Islamist extremists like this, you and I are just as much of an infidel in their eyes as the guy who was beheaded in this attack on Friday and therefore we could easily be next. These people will find different excuses to carry out these attacks. They become sufficiently enraged and resort to the medieval just by the very existence of Western culture.

Yeah, I get what you're saying about the real hardliners, and the same goes for most religions "by the book" - but how many times a day, in Paris, is alcohol consumed, money gambled, western music played and ladies leave the house without the man's permission? Yet this went a stage further, to provoke someone into carrying out this act.

There are all sorts of things I wouldn't be prepared to sacrifice. I just think that we could all live without doing something as minor (in the eyes of a non-muslim) as depicting the prophet. It really pisses people off, we shouldn't do it. It's not a huge price to pay - arguably unlike giving up alcohol or all of the other things you mention.

[Smartie]

I don't think we know enough about this particular situation to imply that the teacher didn't respect different points of view. He appeared to have been a very experienced, well respected member of his profession and from what I've read he was attempting to present a balanced narrative. Unlike the unbalanced nutter who saw fit to behead him for it.

Is it really "presenting a balanced narrative" to do something that you know to be deeply offensive to a particular group in a city where there is a sizeable population of the very people who would be deeply offended?

A level of offence that has known, historical consequence varying from death threats to brutal executions.

[superfurryhibby]

Without condoning the barbaric actions of the perpetrator, what is it about people that they feel they need to make points by doing things like depicting the prophet?

It clearly antagonises people on a level that many of us don't understand.

Is it too much to ask for us to not draw certain cartoons etc?

I get freedom of expression etc but there should also be respect for different points of view and priorities.

If we were being deprived of oxygen or food or something that we require for our existence then fair enough. But surely we can acknowledge the sensitivities of the situation and just not go there?

I'm not a religious person but I have no desire whatsoever to disrespect the pope, prophets, churches, religious texts or anyone/ anything else. My rights to freedom of expression can gladly take a back seat if it means that I don't sufficiently enrage folk that they feel they need to resort to the medieval.

Can’t agree with this.

I think the extremists maybe need to tone down the beheading response impulse and get a bit more in touch with the values of the broader society where they live. Personally, I’ll disrespect whoever I want, within the boundaries of reason and legality.

[G B Young]

Is it really "presenting a balanced narrative" to do something that you know to be deeply offensive to a particular group in a city where there is a sizeable population of the very people who would be deeply offended?

A level of offence that has known, historical consequence varying from death threats to brutal executions.

As I said, I don't know enough about what he was trying to achieve with the lesson in question. Just going by what's been made public so far the implication is that he was a guy who would seek to unite rather than divide. Not being able to go near certain subjects because you run the risk of being beheaded seems a crazy state of affairs and the nationwide outpouring of solidarity with him underlines that.

[Pretty Boy]

The parable of the mustard seed appears in 3 of the canonical Gospels. It's a fairly well known parable about the growth of a large plant from a tiny seed, however the part that always strikes a chord with me is the opening of the story, from Matthews Gospel:

'The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.'

Whenever I am frustrated by the Church establishment; be that clerical abuses, an obtuse attitude towards questions of morality or whatever other of the many faults I could list about the catholic Church, I remind myself that, among the laity and lower ranking clergy at any rate, the wheat outnumbers the weeds. When it comes to considering the question of Islamist terrorism I take a similar view. There are between 1.5 and 2 billion Muslims worldwide and the actions of a tiny percentage should not shape the way we see the religion nor our actions or attitude towards it.

The question of depicting Muhammad through imagery is not directly referenced in the Quaran. It is a later teaching that deals with imagery around all creatures of creation, even then it is debatable whether it is explicitly forbidden or only discouraged. Most observant Muslims tend to err on the side of caution. The 2nd of the 10 Commandments explicitly forbids the taking of the name of God in vain. Along with further teachings in Deuteronomy, this has led to many Jews not writing the full name of God in Hebrew, it is often written as an abbreviation. In recent years this has extended to the name God being written as G-d in English, particularly among American Jews. How many people on a daily basis use phrases such as 'for Christs sake', 'Jesus Christ' or even something as seemingly innocuous as 'I swear to God'? For many Christians this would be seen as a blatant disregard of the same 2nd commandment and deeply offensive. I'm not sure if it is still so but it certainly used to be the case that such phrases where the most complained about when used on BBC shows.

Very few people would suggest we all start abbreviating the name of God in writing nor should people who have no interest in the Christian faith alter their every day language to appease those who do (albeit they may do so when in a Church for a wedding or so on). Islam should be fair game for being satirised in the same way as other faiths are. Imagery from the faith should be admissible as evidence for making a wider point. To come back to my initial point; the weeds, in any religion, should not dictate how we interact with, criticise, satirise or enagage with the wider subject. The fault lies not with those who choose to create an image of the Prophet but rather with those who view beheading as a proportionate response.

[Sir David Gray]

Three people stabbed to death in a terrorist attack in Nice.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54729957

[Keith_M]

Three people stabbed to death in a terrorist attack in Nice.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54729957


What's the common factor in most terrorist attacks in recent years?

[Sylar]

There really is no good news just now, is there?

[One Day Soon]

The parable of the mustard seed appears in 3 of the canonical Gospels. It's a fairly well known parable about the growth of a large plant from a tiny seed, however the part that always strikes a chord with me is the opening of the story, from Matthews Gospel:

'The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.'

Whenever I am frustrated by the Church establishment; be that clerical abuses, an obtuse attitude towards questions of morality or whatever other of the many faults I could list about the catholic Church, I remind myself that, among the laity and lower ranking clergy at any rate, the wheat outnumbers the weeds. When it comes to considering the question of Islamist terrorism I take a similar view. There are between 1.5 and 2 billion Muslims worldwide and the actions of a tiny percentage should not shape the way we see the religion nor our actions or attitude towards it.

The question of depicting Muhammad through imagery is not directly referenced in the Quaran. It is a later teaching that deals with imagery around all creatures of creation, even then it is debatable whether it is explicitly forbidden or only discouraged. Most observant Muslims tend to err on the side of caution. The 2nd of the 10 Commandments explicitly forbids the taking of the name of God in vain. Along with further teachings in Deuteronomy, this has led to many Jews not writing the full name of God in Hebrew, it is often written as an abbreviation. In recent years this has extended to the name God being written as G-d in English, particularly among American Jews. How many people on a daily basis use phrases such as 'for Christs sake', 'Jesus Christ' or even something as seemingly innocuous as 'I swear to God'? For many Christians this would be seen as a blatant disregard of the same 2nd commandment and deeply offensive. I'm not sure if it is still so but it certainly used to be the case that such phrases where the most complained about when used on BBC shows.

Very few people would suggest we all start abbreviating the name of God in writing nor should people who have no interest in the Christian faith alter their every day language to appease those who do (albeit they may do so when in a Church for a wedding or so on). Islam should be fair game for being satirised in the same way as other faiths are. Imagery from the faith should be admissible as evidence for making a wider point. To come back to my initial point; the weeds, in any religion, should not dictate how we interact with, criticise, satirise or enagage with the wider subject. The fault lies not with those who choose to create an image of the Prophet but rather with those who view beheading as a proportionate response.

This is a superb post, just superb.

[G B Young]

The parable of the mustard seed appears in 3 of the canonical Gospels. It's a fairly well known parable about the growth of a large plant from a tiny seed, however the part that always strikes a chord with me is the opening of the story, from Matthews Gospel:

'The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.'

Whenever I am frustrated by the Church establishment; be that clerical abuses, an obtuse attitude towards questions of morality or whatever other of the many faults I could list about the catholic Church, I remind myself that, among the laity and lower ranking clergy at any rate, the wheat outnumbers the weeds. When it comes to considering the question of Islamist terrorism I take a similar view. There are between 1.5 and 2 billion Muslims worldwide and the actions of a tiny percentage should not shape the way we see the religion nor our actions or attitude towards it.

The question of depicting Muhammad through imagery is not directly referenced in the Quaran. It is a later teaching that deals with imagery around all creatures of creation, even then it is debatable whether it is explicitly forbidden or only discouraged. Most observant Muslims tend to err on the side of caution. The 2nd of the 10 Commandments explicitly forbids the taking of the name of God in vain. Along with further teachings in Deuteronomy, this has led to many Jews not writing the full name of God in Hebrew, it is often written as an abbreviation. In recent years this has extended to the name God being written as G-d in English, particularly among American Jews. How many people on a daily basis use phrases such as 'for Christs sake', 'Jesus Christ' or even something as seemingly innocuous as 'I swear to God'? For many Christians this would be seen as a blatant disregard of the same 2nd commandment and deeply offensive. I'm not sure if it is still so but it certainly used to be the case that such phrases where the most complained about when used on BBC shows.

Very few people would suggest we all start abbreviating the name of God in writing nor should people who have no interest in the Christian faith alter their every day language to appease those who do (albeit they may do so when in a Church for a wedding or so on). Islam should be fair game for being satirised in the same way as other faiths are. Imagery from the faith should be admissible as evidence for making a wider point. To come back to my initial point; the weeds, in any religion, should not dictate how we interact with, criticise, satirise or enagage with the wider subject. The fault lies not with those who choose to create an image of the Prophet but rather with those who view beheading as a proportionate response.

Couldn't agree more.

[Pretty Boy]

An Orthodox Priest has just been shot in Lyon.

Seriously injured. Attacker still at large.

[Sir David Gray]

An Orthodox Priest has just been shot in Lyon.

Seriously injured. Attacker still at large.

Just reading that, absolutely dreadful what's going on in France right now.

Shocking.

[hibsbollah]

Just reading that, absolutely dreadful what's going on in France right now.

Shocking.

Shocking indeed, although terrorist attacks have been falling year on year in Europe. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/29/attacks-in-france-put-islamist-extremism-back-in-spotlight

[Hibrandenburg]

Just reading that, absolutely dreadful what's going on in France right now.

Shocking.

I guess the Islamists are hoping to take advantage of the precarious climate caused by Corona. Maybe they think they can tip the scales.