Shootings in Paris - MOD NOTE UPDATED - READ OP

whatismyname wrote: »

Man describes 'saddest moment' after getting into taxi with crying Muslim driver following Paris attacks

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/man-describes-saddest-moment-after-6834933?ICID=FB_mirror_main

Seriously? That was the saddest moment about what happened in Paris on Friday? What an idiot.

Isaiah wrote: »

If you place any amount of people together you will have crime. The chances of which increase with the amount of people and social conditions. It happens in towns and cities, and it will happen in refugee camps. They are running from bombs and guns, then they should be happy to be accomodated in safe areas.

However, the dangers of allowing 100's of thousands of people in from an extremely messed up part of the world where sectarianism and extremism is rife far outweighs the risks associated with accommodating refugees in refugee camps that are remote from the EU.

There they can have their cases heard, or they can choose to wait out the war and return, consulates from other countries can be set up their so people can apply for asylum where they want, to other Middle East countries for example.

It would stop all this chaos and create some order to it. It would also discourage the chancers.

Now off you go to google to try find something bad that happened in Australia’s refugee camp so you can make another "but what about this" retort.

I have quite enough of trying to reason with you, you are unreasonable.

Agree 100%
We should be dictating how refugees/migrants are handled and it should be done in a way that's safest for Europe

Maybe slightly off topic but here's Trump using his own spin on the Paris attacks to win some votes.

It is very, very worrying that this man has amassed such a following.

whatismyname wrote: »

So, so glad that I've yet to come across anything suggesting that.

The article concentrates on how the poor taxi driver feels at losing some business & ends with a mawkish appeal for us all to be "brothers & sisters". The slaughter of people in Paris would appear to take a back seat to the importance of gaining trendy right-on internet points by relating this story. Like I said I'm not entirely unsympathetic, just that focusing on this sort of stuff is a skewing of priorities.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Yet - in my lifetime, in the country where I was born and reared it was one particular religion that would have seen me locked in an institution and taken my son from me - and that religion was not Islam.

Tell the survivors of the Laundries and those women who had their children taken from them that they were not victims of a theocratic state and religious fundamentalism.

Christianity has had to dial back but that battle was fought long and hard for hundreds of years and as the recent SSM debates showed (and no doubt the Repeal the 8th Campaign will reinforce) it's not all sunshine and lollipops now either.
Look at the Kill the Gays Bill in Uganda for example.

Currently on a global scale is it certain Islamic groups that are violently expansionist as happened in the past- Christianity has also been violently expansionist in it's past and could possibly be again in the future.

Expansionist fundamentalist ideologies are the problem - and that is not confined to Islam or religion.

I'm sorry, but just on your first point, you bring up your experiences living in Ireland, yet only a post ago you were berating me for doing the same think and labelled it 'parochialism'?

In any case the fundamental point that I would return to now is the problem of equivalence - you seem to be retreating from the issue that we have a threat of Islamist extremism by saying 'yes but Christianity did bad things in the past too' - but I don't think anyone here least of all myself is disputing that, we're saying it has little to do with the here and now. I'm not particularly sure that the proper response to the Paris attacks is to condemn the sale of indulgences by the Catholic Church in the 16th Century, we are forced to deal with the matters that affect us today.

Incidentally, just on the 'kill the gays' bill in Uganda, it might surprise you to know that that law was ruled as invalid, even if it had not been, I've yet to see evangelical African Christian groups bombing Europe for decaying moral standards - again this is a retreat from the pressing issue.

I would submit that by all means fundamentalist ideologies are the problem, but the frantic insistence on approaching Islamist extremism as just 'one of many' problems seems to underline the fear and unwillingness people have to tackle problems specific to Islamist extremism, for fear of being daubed as racists, far-right, neo-nazi etc, as has happened here. It really smacks of a kind of politics that more about appearing to say the right things rather than tackling the substantive issues.

whatismyname wrote: »

Yes, and what I was referencing, and what you were replying to was them apparently portraying them as the 'real victims', which is far from what it is doing.

I can see why you may take something very different out of it, and your point is certainly very valid, but it's still not what it is doing.

Sorry, but publishing this sort of article when the blood of the murdered is barely dry is very much aimed at portraying people like the taxi driver as victims.

c montgomery wrote: »

Agree 100%
We should be dictating how refugees/migrants are handled and it should be done in a way that's safest for Europe

After you explain why that will decrease the number of terror attacks. Until then the refugee crisis is a separate issue.

Europe is not an island and we are bloody close to africa by sea. What works in Australia won't work here.

You need a way to stop people getting across illegally. Until then closing the borders will not make a bit of difference.

Since no one is addressing this point I am concluding that people care more about their anti immigration policies than coming up with an actual solution.

As for the taxi driver story it was the saddest moment that man had experienced. It was hardly the saddest noment of the weekend but as he wasn't in France he didn't really experience it. I am sure a talk with the relatives of thoae killed would change his mind. Doesn't change the fact that the taxi driver isn't having a tough time with people carrying murder in the name of his god.

Nah, I'd feel empathy for anyone who's close to a horrific disaster and is feeling it.

Terrorists on their way to carry out attack, stopped by police,

ID please, there you go, carry on

no ID out of the car, the car searched explosion,operation over

La Fenetre wrote: »

Gun lovers in the west kill more people in their own countries year in year out that Islamist terrorists ever will.

In fairness I think the problem in the USA doesn't stem from the amount of guns in circulation, but rather how f*cked their society is. Take away the guns and they would use knives or homemade explosives to kill. There are plenty of other countries in the world with very lax gun laws in which very little gun crime occurs - relative to the US standard anyways. Switzerland and Norway for example have quite liberal gun laws, and with the exception of the massive outlier in the Utoya massacre, have a miniscule amount of gun deaths per capita compared to the US.

Custardpi wrote: »

The reality is likely to be somewhat different. Unless you're keyed up & ready for a fight when out of the blue bullets start flying most ordinary people with a gun would be useless. It's all very well to imagine how quickly you'd coldly take out the bad guy with your Smith & Wesson but in real life you'd be diving under the table pissing yourself, possibly dropping your gun on the way.

sure, all depends on who happens to be around at the time…yet while diving under the table and pissing oneself is one option in those places, for us in western europe it tends to be the only option…