|
|
Don't fight on this thread please...
|
On January 10 2015 04:46 Aeromi wrote: Don't fight on this thread please... Too many french for one thread.
|
On January 10 2015 04:49 WhiteDog wrote:Too many french for one thread. hahahaha
exactly what i was thinking :D
|
On January 10 2015 04:44 SiroKO wrote: (removed by the author)
THis thread is derailing quite fast : (
|
On January 10 2015 04:06 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 04:00 Tien wrote:On January 10 2015 03:57 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 03:55 Tien wrote:On January 10 2015 03:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 03:49 Warlock40 wrote: You have a point - perhaps, if Charlie Hebdo had not offended the religion of the suspects, then they would not have been a target for violence.
But here's the thing - if this cartoon provoked the suspects, it is entirely the fault of the suspects for allowing an expression of free speech to cause them to commit crimes. If you are saying that it's the fault of Charlie Hebdo for provoking them, you are essentially blaming the victim. Because the bottom line is that no one in their right mind should let an expression of free speech motivate them to commit murder. I am not saying it's Charlie Hebdo's fault -- obviously. I am saying i don't understand why do people have to provoke people who think differently about things. Is it "just because you can"? It is a different thing to respond to something than it is to obviously provoke someone -- which this falls into imo. Just research the history of satire and all of its forms. Are you against satire? I know very well what satire is. I am not against it. Sad thing here is not all the people know what satire is and some people ARE against it. SNL is satire based on offending people. The Simpsons is satire. Drawings cartoons is satire. Satire is an expression of free speech. Drawing Muhammad is a right we ought to protect. Just because a book 1500 years ago said you are not allowed to draw doesn't mean we have to surrender our right to draw Muhammad so extremists aren't offended. My entire point is you don't need to protect the right to drawing Muhammad by drawing Muhammad if you know it's gonna sooner or later result in numerous people dying because of it. There are other ways to express freedom of speech. There is no right more crucial, more integral to a free society than the right to say what others do not wish to hear. The right to draw Muhammed should be protected more vigorously and ferociously than just about any other right. The moment we begin to second-guess ourselves about speaking our minds because we fear for our lives is the moment we lose the war. There is no room for compromise here. This is an all or nothing situation.
|
On January 10 2015 04:54 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 04:06 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 04:00 Tien wrote:On January 10 2015 03:57 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 03:55 Tien wrote:On January 10 2015 03:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 03:49 Warlock40 wrote: You have a point - perhaps, if Charlie Hebdo had not offended the religion of the suspects, then they would not have been a target for violence.
But here's the thing - if this cartoon provoked the suspects, it is entirely the fault of the suspects for allowing an expression of free speech to cause them to commit crimes. If you are saying that it's the fault of Charlie Hebdo for provoking them, you are essentially blaming the victim. Because the bottom line is that no one in their right mind should let an expression of free speech motivate them to commit murder. I am not saying it's Charlie Hebdo's fault -- obviously. I am saying i don't understand why do people have to provoke people who think differently about things. Is it "just because you can"? It is a different thing to respond to something than it is to obviously provoke someone -- which this falls into imo. Just research the history of satire and all of its forms. Are you against satire? I know very well what satire is. I am not against it. Sad thing here is not all the people know what satire is and some people ARE against it. SNL is satire based on offending people. The Simpsons is satire. Drawings cartoons is satire. Satire is an expression of free speech. Drawing Muhammad is a right we ought to protect. Just because a book 1500 years ago said you are not allowed to draw doesn't mean we have to surrender our right to draw Muhammad so extremists aren't offended. My entire point is you don't need to protect the right to drawing Muhammad by drawing Muhammad if you know it's gonna sooner or later result in numerous people dying because of it. There are other ways to express freedom of speech. There is no right more crucial, more integral to a free society than the right to say what others do not wish to hear. The right to draw Muhammed should be protected more vigorously and ferociously than just about any other right. The moment we begin to second-guess ourselves about speaking our minds because we fear for our lives is the moment we lose the war. There is no room for compromise here. This is an all or nothing situation.
The same logic is used by the extremists and some of their supporting organizations/countries and why they have no difficulty in finding more supporters. Congrats in the world of people trying to argue which way to live is the right one, and each one fighting to the extreme, to attack the other at every opportunity. This is an all or nothing situation, because each side thinks, that they are entirely right and the others are entirely wrong if they do not accept the own believes to 100%
|
On January 10 2015 04:43 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 04:26 Ragnarork wrote:On January 10 2015 04:24 SiroKO wrote:On January 10 2015 04:03 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 03:54 SiroKO wrote: The most revulsing thing to me is the hypocrisy of the French politicians and PC media. Everytime there's an Islamic terrorist attack, they refer to the perpetrators as "monsters" or "terrorists" to deprive them from their ISLAMIC ideology. The truth is, these people motivations are based on a particular, but extremly well-spread and well-documented, understanding of Islam.
So absolute respect for the FN (nationalist, economically at the left, societally at the right) politicians who dare to call these bastards by their names : Islamic terrorists. Not giving a fuck about being boycotted by the PC media, or losing the muslim votes.
Truth against professional political liers.
That's the most revolting thing? Not the, I don't know, 12 people that were murdered in cold blood? You have weird priorities here. While it is important to realise what motivated these monsters, the last thing we need is to alienate the (European) Muslim community as a whole. Not because of fear of reprecussion or some misguided sense of political correctness, but because at the end of the day the only way to get through this current wave of terrorism is us working together. We need to realise that over 99% of Muslims are not the enemy and that they hate what happened as much, and probably more so (because it makes them have to defend themselves) than we do. Decent muslims are most likely a majority among muslims, but this 1% ratio is total crap. There are huge issues regarding the muslim community in France. It is a community with an extreme high proportions of delinquents/criminals, with an extreme high proportion of people on welfare, who refuse to mix with non-muslims (unless they convert and the children get muslims : which is a principle of this religion), who do not cease to be religious (quite the contrary), and who often time remains nationalist toward their "country of origin" while not giving a fuck about France. Now, you can add terrorism to the list of reasons why they're hated. Most non-muslims living near muslims tend to dislike them as a whole. Disliking them as a whole does not mean disliking every single one of them, which would be crazy. It's just considering that the ratio of bastards among that community is too damn high and that there's a specific problem. Seriously, try to see by yourself, and not believe bullshit spewed by hateful people. "Don't touch my country". Yeah sure, these completely don't care. I would be really happy if the "islamic community" in France define themselves as french first and foremost and actually start to make other remember. I'm a teacher in the 93. In some of my class none of my student consider themselves "french". They say "I'm serb", "I'm algerian", etc. They're great kids, with great qualities and values (altho they suck as student for the most part  ) but it's true that overall, they don't feel "french", and more than that in some place they refuse to consider themself as french. I happen to have some algerian blood myself, from my father, and a lot of kids try, at some point of the year, to find clues on that. As soon as they know, they jump every where saying "he's algerian !", while I'm not. Last year I was teaching in a city with an important jewish community and they all thought I was jew because of my name... We, as a society, lost ourselves in particularism and refused to define ourselves through our common membership in the Republic, as citizens. By refusing to defend those transcendental values - the republic, the nation, the citizenship - we've forgot generations of kids for whom being french is not necessarily an evidence. At least, this tragedy might force us to see positively our common membership. Country borders are just lines on a map. Feeling connected to people because you were born (or worse yet, live) inside those arbitrary lines is even more nonsensical than being connected to people because you believe common things. If anything being proud of your country and heritage is doing far more harm than good.
Why don't we start by defining ourselves as human beings for once?
|
On January 10 2015 05:03 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 04:54 Squat wrote:On January 10 2015 04:06 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 04:00 Tien wrote:On January 10 2015 03:57 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 03:55 Tien wrote:On January 10 2015 03:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 03:49 Warlock40 wrote: You have a point - perhaps, if Charlie Hebdo had not offended the religion of the suspects, then they would not have been a target for violence.
But here's the thing - if this cartoon provoked the suspects, it is entirely the fault of the suspects for allowing an expression of free speech to cause them to commit crimes. If you are saying that it's the fault of Charlie Hebdo for provoking them, you are essentially blaming the victim. Because the bottom line is that no one in their right mind should let an expression of free speech motivate them to commit murder. I am not saying it's Charlie Hebdo's fault -- obviously. I am saying i don't understand why do people have to provoke people who think differently about things. Is it "just because you can"? It is a different thing to respond to something than it is to obviously provoke someone -- which this falls into imo. Just research the history of satire and all of its forms. Are you against satire? I know very well what satire is. I am not against it. Sad thing here is not all the people know what satire is and some people ARE against it. SNL is satire based on offending people. The Simpsons is satire. Drawings cartoons is satire. Satire is an expression of free speech. Drawing Muhammad is a right we ought to protect. Just because a book 1500 years ago said you are not allowed to draw doesn't mean we have to surrender our right to draw Muhammad so extremists aren't offended. My entire point is you don't need to protect the right to drawing Muhammad by drawing Muhammad if you know it's gonna sooner or later result in numerous people dying because of it. There are other ways to express freedom of speech. There is no right more crucial, more integral to a free society than the right to say what others do not wish to hear. The right to draw Muhammed should be protected more vigorously and ferociously than just about any other right. The moment we begin to second-guess ourselves about speaking our minds because we fear for our lives is the moment we lose the war. There is no room for compromise here. This is an all or nothing situation. The same logic is used by the extremists and some of their supporting organizations/countries and why they have no difficulty in finding more supporters. Congrats in the world of people trying to argue which way to live is the right one, and each one fighting to the extreme, to attack the other at every opportunity. This is an all or nothing situation, because each side thinks, that they are entirely right and the others are entirely wrong if they do not accept the own believes to 100% You can put a limit to all discourse that promote killing of others and racial hatred maybe ?
|
Apparently Uderzo himself also decided to draw something.
+ Show Spoiler +
Big thank you to our elite police forces.
|
On January 10 2015 05:05 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 05:03 mahrgell wrote:On January 10 2015 04:54 Squat wrote:On January 10 2015 04:06 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 04:00 Tien wrote:On January 10 2015 03:57 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 03:55 Tien wrote:On January 10 2015 03:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:On January 10 2015 03:49 Warlock40 wrote: You have a point - perhaps, if Charlie Hebdo had not offended the religion of the suspects, then they would not have been a target for violence.
But here's the thing - if this cartoon provoked the suspects, it is entirely the fault of the suspects for allowing an expression of free speech to cause them to commit crimes. If you are saying that it's the fault of Charlie Hebdo for provoking them, you are essentially blaming the victim. Because the bottom line is that no one in their right mind should let an expression of free speech motivate them to commit murder. I am not saying it's Charlie Hebdo's fault -- obviously. I am saying i don't understand why do people have to provoke people who think differently about things. Is it "just because you can"? It is a different thing to respond to something than it is to obviously provoke someone -- which this falls into imo. Just research the history of satire and all of its forms. Are you against satire? I know very well what satire is. I am not against it. Sad thing here is not all the people know what satire is and some people ARE against it. SNL is satire based on offending people. The Simpsons is satire. Drawings cartoons is satire. Satire is an expression of free speech. Drawing Muhammad is a right we ought to protect. Just because a book 1500 years ago said you are not allowed to draw doesn't mean we have to surrender our right to draw Muhammad so extremists aren't offended. My entire point is you don't need to protect the right to drawing Muhammad by drawing Muhammad if you know it's gonna sooner or later result in numerous people dying because of it. There are other ways to express freedom of speech. There is no right more crucial, more integral to a free society than the right to say what others do not wish to hear. The right to draw Muhammed should be protected more vigorously and ferociously than just about any other right. The moment we begin to second-guess ourselves about speaking our minds because we fear for our lives is the moment we lose the war. There is no room for compromise here. This is an all or nothing situation. The same logic is used by the extremists and some of their supporting organizations/countries and why they have no difficulty in finding more supporters. Congrats in the world of people trying to argue which way to live is the right one, and each one fighting to the extreme, to attack the other at every opportunity. This is an all or nothing situation, because each side thinks, that they are entirely right and the others are entirely wrong if they do not accept the own believes to 100% You can put a limit to all discourse that promote killing of others and racial hatred maybe ?
I certainly do. But I also believe, that where ever you draw that line, that those trying to dance on it are not exactly helping the situations. And in some way those caricatures provoked racial hatred. If your country has to lock down it's embassies for a fair while, if you cause mass protests in several dozen countries, if several hundred millions people feel offended, maybe you could have done smarter then insisting on the fact, that for yourself the line where things become unacceptable is a bit further.
In no way I would ever support or even try to find any justification for what has happened. But i deeply believe, that this extremism of ppl having to "use and live their rights" to the extreme, without any common sense and looking what they do to others, is toxic and will not help their own beliefs!
|
Canada16217 Posts
On January 10 2015 04:38 Makro wrote: Not safe, you are warned, image of the terrorist running into the RAID and being shot (on the video you could see the hostage already dead before the police came)
I don't have the video it was broadcast on TV.
@ragnarok
really moving, should be shown on TV No NSFW images or videos please(read the modnote!)
|
On January 10 2015 05:04 Mikau wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 04:43 WhiteDog wrote:On January 10 2015 04:26 Ragnarork wrote:On January 10 2015 04:24 SiroKO wrote:On January 10 2015 04:03 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 03:54 SiroKO wrote: The most revulsing thing to me is the hypocrisy of the French politicians and PC media. Everytime there's an Islamic terrorist attack, they refer to the perpetrators as "monsters" or "terrorists" to deprive them from their ISLAMIC ideology. The truth is, these people motivations are based on a particular, but extremly well-spread and well-documented, understanding of Islam.
So absolute respect for the FN (nationalist, economically at the left, societally at the right) politicians who dare to call these bastards by their names : Islamic terrorists. Not giving a fuck about being boycotted by the PC media, or losing the muslim votes.
Truth against professional political liers.
That's the most revolting thing? Not the, I don't know, 12 people that were murdered in cold blood? You have weird priorities here. While it is important to realise what motivated these monsters, the last thing we need is to alienate the (European) Muslim community as a whole. Not because of fear of reprecussion or some misguided sense of political correctness, but because at the end of the day the only way to get through this current wave of terrorism is us working together. We need to realise that over 99% of Muslims are not the enemy and that they hate what happened as much, and probably more so (because it makes them have to defend themselves) than we do. Decent muslims are most likely a majority among muslims, but this 1% ratio is total crap. There are huge issues regarding the muslim community in France. It is a community with an extreme high proportions of delinquents/criminals, with an extreme high proportion of people on welfare, who refuse to mix with non-muslims (unless they convert and the children get muslims : which is a principle of this religion), who do not cease to be religious (quite the contrary), and who often time remains nationalist toward their "country of origin" while not giving a fuck about France. Now, you can add terrorism to the list of reasons why they're hated. Most non-muslims living near muslims tend to dislike them as a whole. Disliking them as a whole does not mean disliking every single one of them, which would be crazy. It's just considering that the ratio of bastards among that community is too damn high and that there's a specific problem. Seriously, try to see by yourself, and not believe bullshit spewed by hateful people. https://twitter.com/nellyolson75555/status/553547348723654657"Don't touch my country". Yeah sure, these completely don't care. I would be really happy if the "islamic community" in France define themselves as french first and foremost and actually start to make other remember. I'm a teacher in the 93. In some of my class none of my student consider themselves "french". They say "I'm serb", "I'm algerian", etc. They're great kids, with great qualities and values (altho they suck as student for the most part  ) but it's true that overall, they don't feel "french", and more than that in some place they refuse to consider themself as french. I happen to have some algerian blood myself, from my father, and a lot of kids try, at some point of the year, to find clues on that. As soon as they know, they jump every where saying "he's algerian !", while I'm not. Last year I was teaching in a city with an important jewish community and they all thought I was jew because of my name... We, as a society, lost ourselves in particularism and refused to define ourselves through our common membership in the Republic, as citizens. By refusing to defend those transcendental values - the republic, the nation, the citizenship - we've forgot generations of kids for whom being french is not necessarily an evidence. At least, this tragedy might force us to see positively our common membership. Country borders are just lines on a map. Feeling connected to people because you were born (or worse yet, live) inside those arbitrary lines is even more nonsensical than being connected to people because you believe common things. If anything being proud of your country and heritage is doing far more harm than good. Why don't we start by defining ourselves as human beings for once? Country borders yes. But living with people, having a sense of community and common membership, living under the same law and feeling those laws are legitimate : all those things have value and are needed to live in a society. The desire to be part of a group is a human trait, and when the state and the nation are weak, people feel they belong to a cult, a religion or a mafia. I personally prefer the nation. Note that I am an internationalist, but I'm not a cosmopolitanist, nor a nihilist.
|
There is nothing in Islam that says that you should murder people who draw pictures of the prophet.
There IS something in Islam that says you should not murder.
These people are lunatics. They and all terrorists who claim to do things like this in the name of Islam are brainwashed and have no real understanding of what Islam is.
As someone who lived in Paris for a long time as a kid I am very saddened by these events.
Je suis Charlie.
|
France17333 Posts
On January 10 2015 05:13 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 05:04 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 04:43 WhiteDog wrote:On January 10 2015 04:26 Ragnarork wrote:On January 10 2015 04:24 SiroKO wrote:On January 10 2015 04:03 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 03:54 SiroKO wrote: The most revulsing thing to me is the hypocrisy of the French politicians and PC media. Everytime there's an Islamic terrorist attack, they refer to the perpetrators as "monsters" or "terrorists" to deprive them from their ISLAMIC ideology. The truth is, these people motivations are based on a particular, but extremly well-spread and well-documented, understanding of Islam.
So absolute respect for the FN (nationalist, economically at the left, societally at the right) politicians who dare to call these bastards by their names : Islamic terrorists. Not giving a fuck about being boycotted by the PC media, or losing the muslim votes.
Truth against professional political liers.
That's the most revolting thing? Not the, I don't know, 12 people that were murdered in cold blood? You have weird priorities here. While it is important to realise what motivated these monsters, the last thing we need is to alienate the (European) Muslim community as a whole. Not because of fear of reprecussion or some misguided sense of political correctness, but because at the end of the day the only way to get through this current wave of terrorism is us working together. We need to realise that over 99% of Muslims are not the enemy and that they hate what happened as much, and probably more so (because it makes them have to defend themselves) than we do. Decent muslims are most likely a majority among muslims, but this 1% ratio is total crap. There are huge issues regarding the muslim community in France. It is a community with an extreme high proportions of delinquents/criminals, with an extreme high proportion of people on welfare, who refuse to mix with non-muslims (unless they convert and the children get muslims : which is a principle of this religion), who do not cease to be religious (quite the contrary), and who often time remains nationalist toward their "country of origin" while not giving a fuck about France. Now, you can add terrorism to the list of reasons why they're hated. Most non-muslims living near muslims tend to dislike them as a whole. Disliking them as a whole does not mean disliking every single one of them, which would be crazy. It's just considering that the ratio of bastards among that community is too damn high and that there's a specific problem. Seriously, try to see by yourself, and not believe bullshit spewed by hateful people. https://twitter.com/nellyolson75555/status/553547348723654657"Don't touch my country". Yeah sure, these completely don't care. I would be really happy if the "islamic community" in France define themselves as french first and foremost and actually start to make other remember. I'm a teacher in the 93. In some of my class none of my student consider themselves "french". They say "I'm serb", "I'm algerian", etc. They're great kids, with great qualities and values (altho they suck as student for the most part  ) but it's true that overall, they don't feel "french", and more than that in some place they refuse to consider themself as french. I happen to have some algerian blood myself, from my father, and a lot of kids try, at some point of the year, to find clues on that. As soon as they know, they jump every where saying "he's algerian !", while I'm not. Last year I was teaching in a city with an important jewish community and they all thought I was jew because of my name... We, as a society, lost ourselves in particularism and refused to define ourselves through our common membership in the Republic, as citizens. By refusing to defend those transcendental values - the republic, the nation, the citizenship - we've forgot generations of kids for whom being french is not necessarily an evidence. At least, this tragedy might force us to see positively our common membership. Country borders are just lines on a map. Feeling connected to people because you were born (or worse yet, live) inside those arbitrary lines is even more nonsensical than being connected to people because you believe common things. If anything being proud of your country and heritage is doing far more harm than good. Why don't we start by defining ourselves as human beings for once? Country borders yes. But living with people, having a sense of community and common membership, living under the same law and feeling those laws are legitimate : all those things have value and are needed to live in a society. The desire to be part of a group is a human trait, and when the state and the nation are weak, people feel they belong to a cult, a religion or a mafia. I personally prefer the nation. Note that I am an internationalist, but I'm not a cosmopolitanist, nor a nihilist. Tbh nationalism did as much damage, if not more, as any other group, whatever its basis is.
|
Additionally:
Murdering an innocent person for drawing the prophet is like murdering someone for eating bacon. Sure, you're not supposed to do it, but nowhere in Islam does it say OTHERS aren't allowed to. And the only technical justification for killing someone under jihad is if they are impeding your ability to practice your own religion. Which clearly a cartoon of the prophet does not do.
There is no religious basis for anything these terrorists have done.
|
On January 10 2015 05:20 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 05:13 WhiteDog wrote:On January 10 2015 05:04 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 04:43 WhiteDog wrote:On January 10 2015 04:26 Ragnarork wrote:On January 10 2015 04:24 SiroKO wrote:On January 10 2015 04:03 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 03:54 SiroKO wrote: The most revulsing thing to me is the hypocrisy of the French politicians and PC media. Everytime there's an Islamic terrorist attack, they refer to the perpetrators as "monsters" or "terrorists" to deprive them from their ISLAMIC ideology. The truth is, these people motivations are based on a particular, but extremly well-spread and well-documented, understanding of Islam.
So absolute respect for the FN (nationalist, economically at the left, societally at the right) politicians who dare to call these bastards by their names : Islamic terrorists. Not giving a fuck about being boycotted by the PC media, or losing the muslim votes.
Truth against professional political liers.
That's the most revolting thing? Not the, I don't know, 12 people that were murdered in cold blood? You have weird priorities here. While it is important to realise what motivated these monsters, the last thing we need is to alienate the (European) Muslim community as a whole. Not because of fear of reprecussion or some misguided sense of political correctness, but because at the end of the day the only way to get through this current wave of terrorism is us working together. We need to realise that over 99% of Muslims are not the enemy and that they hate what happened as much, and probably more so (because it makes them have to defend themselves) than we do. Decent muslims are most likely a majority among muslims, but this 1% ratio is total crap. There are huge issues regarding the muslim community in France. It is a community with an extreme high proportions of delinquents/criminals, with an extreme high proportion of people on welfare, who refuse to mix with non-muslims (unless they convert and the children get muslims : which is a principle of this religion), who do not cease to be religious (quite the contrary), and who often time remains nationalist toward their "country of origin" while not giving a fuck about France. Now, you can add terrorism to the list of reasons why they're hated. Most non-muslims living near muslims tend to dislike them as a whole. Disliking them as a whole does not mean disliking every single one of them, which would be crazy. It's just considering that the ratio of bastards among that community is too damn high and that there's a specific problem. Seriously, try to see by yourself, and not believe bullshit spewed by hateful people. https://twitter.com/nellyolson75555/status/553547348723654657"Don't touch my country". Yeah sure, these completely don't care. I would be really happy if the "islamic community" in France define themselves as french first and foremost and actually start to make other remember. I'm a teacher in the 93. In some of my class none of my student consider themselves "french". They say "I'm serb", "I'm algerian", etc. They're great kids, with great qualities and values (altho they suck as student for the most part  ) but it's true that overall, they don't feel "french", and more than that in some place they refuse to consider themself as french. I happen to have some algerian blood myself, from my father, and a lot of kids try, at some point of the year, to find clues on that. As soon as they know, they jump every where saying "he's algerian !", while I'm not. Last year I was teaching in a city with an important jewish community and they all thought I was jew because of my name... We, as a society, lost ourselves in particularism and refused to define ourselves through our common membership in the Republic, as citizens. By refusing to defend those transcendental values - the republic, the nation, the citizenship - we've forgot generations of kids for whom being french is not necessarily an evidence. At least, this tragedy might force us to see positively our common membership. Country borders are just lines on a map. Feeling connected to people because you were born (or worse yet, live) inside those arbitrary lines is even more nonsensical than being connected to people because you believe common things. If anything being proud of your country and heritage is doing far more harm than good. Why don't we start by defining ourselves as human beings for once? Country borders yes. But living with people, having a sense of community and common membership, living under the same law and feeling those laws are legitimate : all those things have value and are needed to live in a society. The desire to be part of a group is a human trait, and when the state and the nation are weak, people feel they belong to a cult, a religion or a mafia. I personally prefer the nation. Note that I am an internationalist, but I'm not a cosmopolitanist, nor a nihilist. Tbh nationalism did as much damage, if not more, as any other group, whatever its basis is. Nationalism is an extremism. It's irrelevant.
|
France17333 Posts
On January 10 2015 05:21 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 05:20 OtherWorld wrote:On January 10 2015 05:13 WhiteDog wrote:On January 10 2015 05:04 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 04:43 WhiteDog wrote:On January 10 2015 04:26 Ragnarork wrote:On January 10 2015 04:24 SiroKO wrote:On January 10 2015 04:03 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 03:54 SiroKO wrote: The most revulsing thing to me is the hypocrisy of the French politicians and PC media. Everytime there's an Islamic terrorist attack, they refer to the perpetrators as "monsters" or "terrorists" to deprive them from their ISLAMIC ideology. The truth is, these people motivations are based on a particular, but extremly well-spread and well-documented, understanding of Islam.
So absolute respect for the FN (nationalist, economically at the left, societally at the right) politicians who dare to call these bastards by their names : Islamic terrorists. Not giving a fuck about being boycotted by the PC media, or losing the muslim votes.
Truth against professional political liers.
That's the most revolting thing? Not the, I don't know, 12 people that were murdered in cold blood? You have weird priorities here. While it is important to realise what motivated these monsters, the last thing we need is to alienate the (European) Muslim community as a whole. Not because of fear of reprecussion or some misguided sense of political correctness, but because at the end of the day the only way to get through this current wave of terrorism is us working together. We need to realise that over 99% of Muslims are not the enemy and that they hate what happened as much, and probably more so (because it makes them have to defend themselves) than we do. Decent muslims are most likely a majority among muslims, but this 1% ratio is total crap. There are huge issues regarding the muslim community in France. It is a community with an extreme high proportions of delinquents/criminals, with an extreme high proportion of people on welfare, who refuse to mix with non-muslims (unless they convert and the children get muslims : which is a principle of this religion), who do not cease to be religious (quite the contrary), and who often time remains nationalist toward their "country of origin" while not giving a fuck about France. Now, you can add terrorism to the list of reasons why they're hated. Most non-muslims living near muslims tend to dislike them as a whole. Disliking them as a whole does not mean disliking every single one of them, which would be crazy. It's just considering that the ratio of bastards among that community is too damn high and that there's a specific problem. Seriously, try to see by yourself, and not believe bullshit spewed by hateful people. https://twitter.com/nellyolson75555/status/553547348723654657"Don't touch my country". Yeah sure, these completely don't care. I would be really happy if the "islamic community" in France define themselves as french first and foremost and actually start to make other remember. I'm a teacher in the 93. In some of my class none of my student consider themselves "french". They say "I'm serb", "I'm algerian", etc. They're great kids, with great qualities and values (altho they suck as student for the most part  ) but it's true that overall, they don't feel "french", and more than that in some place they refuse to consider themself as french. I happen to have some algerian blood myself, from my father, and a lot of kids try, at some point of the year, to find clues on that. As soon as they know, they jump every where saying "he's algerian !", while I'm not. Last year I was teaching in a city with an important jewish community and they all thought I was jew because of my name... We, as a society, lost ourselves in particularism and refused to define ourselves through our common membership in the Republic, as citizens. By refusing to defend those transcendental values - the republic, the nation, the citizenship - we've forgot generations of kids for whom being french is not necessarily an evidence. At least, this tragedy might force us to see positively our common membership. Country borders are just lines on a map. Feeling connected to people because you were born (or worse yet, live) inside those arbitrary lines is even more nonsensical than being connected to people because you believe common things. If anything being proud of your country and heritage is doing far more harm than good. Why don't we start by defining ourselves as human beings for once? Country borders yes. But living with people, having a sense of community and common membership, living under the same law and feeling those laws are legitimate : all those things have value and are needed to live in a society. The desire to be part of a group is a human trait, and when the state and the nation are weak, people feel they belong to a cult, a religion or a mafia. I personally prefer the nation. Note that I am an internationalist, but I'm not a cosmopolitanist, nor a nihilist. Tbh nationalism did as much damage, if not more, as any other group, whatever its basis is. Nationalism is an extremism. It's irrelevant. But then feeling like you belong to a cult, religion or mafia is not a problem as long as it's moderate and not pushed into extremism?
|
On January 10 2015 05:13 DinoMight wrote: There is nothing in Islam that says that you should murder people who draw pictures of the prophet.
There IS something in Islam that says you should not murder.
These people are lunatics. They and all terrorists who claim to do things like this in the name of Islam are brainwashed and have no real understanding of what Islam is.
As someone who lived in Paris for a long time as a kid I am very saddened by these events.
Je suis Charlie.
in my opinion, religion has little to do with it. you can find anything in any religious scripture to justify any actions.
it has to do with attacking identity which happens to be islam. someone could do offensive stuff to the emperor of japan and some japanese nationalists wouldnt just sit by while their leader is being mocked publicly. and this can apply to any group of people and what they do when their identity is mocked depends on their "culture" i guess, some take it more serious than others and "freedom of speech" to some is not a valid excuse.
|
On January 10 2015 05:21 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2015 05:20 OtherWorld wrote:On January 10 2015 05:13 WhiteDog wrote:On January 10 2015 05:04 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 04:43 WhiteDog wrote:On January 10 2015 04:26 Ragnarork wrote:On January 10 2015 04:24 SiroKO wrote:On January 10 2015 04:03 Mikau wrote:On January 10 2015 03:54 SiroKO wrote: The most revulsing thing to me is the hypocrisy of the French politicians and PC media. Everytime there's an Islamic terrorist attack, they refer to the perpetrators as "monsters" or "terrorists" to deprive them from their ISLAMIC ideology. The truth is, these people motivations are based on a particular, but extremly well-spread and well-documented, understanding of Islam.
So absolute respect for the FN (nationalist, economically at the left, societally at the right) politicians who dare to call these bastards by their names : Islamic terrorists. Not giving a fuck about being boycotted by the PC media, or losing the muslim votes.
Truth against professional political liers.
That's the most revolting thing? Not the, I don't know, 12 people that were murdered in cold blood? You have weird priorities here. While it is important to realise what motivated these monsters, the last thing we need is to alienate the (European) Muslim community as a whole. Not because of fear of reprecussion or some misguided sense of political correctness, but because at the end of the day the only way to get through this current wave of terrorism is us working together. We need to realise that over 99% of Muslims are not the enemy and that they hate what happened as much, and probably more so (because it makes them have to defend themselves) than we do. Decent muslims are most likely a majority among muslims, but this 1% ratio is total crap. There are huge issues regarding the muslim community in France. It is a community with an extreme high proportions of delinquents/criminals, with an extreme high proportion of people on welfare, who refuse to mix with non-muslims (unless they convert and the children get muslims : which is a principle of this religion), who do not cease to be religious (quite the contrary), and who often time remains nationalist toward their "country of origin" while not giving a fuck about France. Now, you can add terrorism to the list of reasons why they're hated. Most non-muslims living near muslims tend to dislike them as a whole. Disliking them as a whole does not mean disliking every single one of them, which would be crazy. It's just considering that the ratio of bastards among that community is too damn high and that there's a specific problem. Seriously, try to see by yourself, and not believe bullshit spewed by hateful people. https://twitter.com/nellyolson75555/status/553547348723654657"Don't touch my country". Yeah sure, these completely don't care. I would be really happy if the "islamic community" in France define themselves as french first and foremost and actually start to make other remember. I'm a teacher in the 93. In some of my class none of my student consider themselves "french". They say "I'm serb", "I'm algerian", etc. They're great kids, with great qualities and values (altho they suck as student for the most part  ) but it's true that overall, they don't feel "french", and more than that in some place they refuse to consider themself as french. I happen to have some algerian blood myself, from my father, and a lot of kids try, at some point of the year, to find clues on that. As soon as they know, they jump every where saying "he's algerian !", while I'm not. Last year I was teaching in a city with an important jewish community and they all thought I was jew because of my name... We, as a society, lost ourselves in particularism and refused to define ourselves through our common membership in the Republic, as citizens. By refusing to defend those transcendental values - the republic, the nation, the citizenship - we've forgot generations of kids for whom being french is not necessarily an evidence. At least, this tragedy might force us to see positively our common membership. Country borders are just lines on a map. Feeling connected to people because you were born (or worse yet, live) inside those arbitrary lines is even more nonsensical than being connected to people because you believe common things. If anything being proud of your country and heritage is doing far more harm than good. Why don't we start by defining ourselves as human beings for once? Country borders yes. But living with people, having a sense of community and common membership, living under the same law and feeling those laws are legitimate : all those things have value and are needed to live in a society. The desire to be part of a group is a human trait, and when the state and the nation are weak, people feel they belong to a cult, a religion or a mafia. I personally prefer the nation. Note that I am an internationalist, but I'm not a cosmopolitanist, nor a nihilist. Tbh nationalism did as much damage, if not more, as any other group, whatever its basis is. Nationalism is an extremism. It's irrelevant.
I think that a group of people unifying under a common language, food, traditions, etc. is not unreasonable.
|
|
|
|
|