Shootings in Paris - MOD NOTE UPDATED - READ OP

Billy86 · 19-03-2016 01:33AM

walshyn93 wrote: »

Where in Nodins comment did he use the word "all"? As in "all Muslims". He said "Muslims" and these jihadists who want to kill us are Muslims.

There seems to be some mass psychosis where when people hear a statement involving a minority group their subconscious inserts the word "all" where it doesn't exist.

If someone was to say "gangsters want to kill you" are you going to assume that the Triads, the Yakuza, the Russian mob, the Costa Nostra and the Westies are all out to get you or will you assume that a specific group of people are being referred to?

If someone says 'the Irish will kill you' do you assume the IRA?

But anyway, you know who could help us with this?

Nodin!

Dear Nodin,

When you sarcastically quipped "muslims are out to kill us all and they are under your bed" did you mean to sarcastically infer all Muslims are out to get us thus taking the p*ss out of that mindset some seem to have? Or, did you mean to sarcastically infer that only certain Muslims are out to get us but not all, in order to take the p*ss out of the posters on here who do not consider Muslims to be terrorists etc by default?

Best regards,
Billy.

walshyn93 · 19-03-2016 01:54AM

Billy86 wrote: »

If someone says 'the Irish will kill you' do you assume the IRA?

But anyway, you know who could help us with this?

Nodin!

Dear Nodin,

When you sarcastically quipped "muslims are out to kill us all and they are under your bed" did you mean to sarcastically infer all Muslims are out to get us thus taking the p*ss out of that mindset some seem to have? Or, did you mean to sarcastically infer that only certain Muslims are out to get us but not all, in order to take the p*ss out of the posters on here who do not consider Muslims to be terrorists etc by default?

Best regards,
Billy.

No, but if you said Irish people are trying to kill you, you would have to assume it was a group of Irish people not the entire Irish population. If you're asking Nodin what he really meant you're missing the point.

Can you not simply comprehend how absurd it would be for someone to imply that all Muslims were terrorists and accept that when someone refers to Muslims killing people they're not referring to all Muslims?

walshyn93 · 19-03-2016 01:56AM

ArtSmart wrote: »

Well, it seems the 'educated' are in full flight.

Aint no truck in trying to trump a Dose of Donalds Drumpfs

Art, out.

Why does no one seem to know what this word means any more?

"Educated" has become a leftist's euphemism for "thinks like me".

AlekSmart · 19-03-2016 02:34AM

stefanovich wrote: »

If she was Muslim she wouldn't go near you.

Oh I dunno about that....Muslim gals can be every bit as itchy as any others,but,it's her elder relatives who will make her mind up for her.

So,unless Billy 86 is well enough versed in the Qur'an to recite random passages backwards to a Led Zep backing track,he would be well advised to watch his ass when dealing with his Bosnian Beauty....Her religion will come first...whether she likes it or not

She'll most likely be treading a very fine-line.

Billy86 · 19-03-2016 02:51AM

walshyn93 wrote: »

No, but if you said Irish people are trying to kill you, you would have to assume it was a group of Irish people not the entire Irish population. If you're asking Nodin what he really meant you're missing the point.

Can you not simply comprehend how absurd it would be for someone to imply that all Muslims were terrorists and accept that when someone refers to Muslims killing people they're not referring to all Muslims?

You really do seem to struggle with the concept of sarcasm.

Billy86 · 19-03-2016 02:53AM

AlekSmart wrote: »

Oh I dunno about that....Muslim gals can be every bit as itchy as any others,but,it's her elder relatives who will make her mind up for her.

So,unless Billy 86 is well enough versed in the Qur'an to recite random passages backwards to a Led Zep backing track,he would be well advised to watch his ass when dealing with his Bosnian Beauty....Her religion will come first...whether she likes it or not

She'll most likely be treading a very fine-line.

Nope, normal family in that regard - scary a thought as that might be for you.

walshyn93 · 19-03-2016 03:10AM

Billy86 wrote: »

You really do seem to struggle with the concept of sarcasm.

You're just using sarcasm as a cloak to avoid scrutiny of your opinions. You seem to struggle with the notion that others can read between the lines.

walshyn93 · 19-03-2016 03:10AM

Billy86 wrote: »

Nope, normal family in that regard - scary a thought as that might be for you.

They're as normal as you want them to be. You made them up after all.

Billy86 · 19-03-2016 03:17AM

walshyn93 wrote: »

They're as normal as you want them to be. You made them up after all.

None of this is real, you keep telling yourself that.

suicide_circus · 19-03-2016 04:31AM

Billy, if she was a GOOD Muslim, this convenient Bosnian girl who suits your argument so well, wouldn't have gone near you.

ArtSmart · 19-03-2016 07:59AM

ArtSmart wrote: »

You're supporting my point.

Islam is a religion, with many adherents (i.6 billion) and different strains.

ISIS is a terrorist group.

If you're saying that their religion is the only 'common denominator,' I say you are mistaken.

Just like the PIRA, ISIS is motivated by many different things.

Hence my first comment.

To justify the statement that their only common denominator is Islam, is to imply that their religion is their sole motivating factor (or main factor).

But if that is the case, why are the other 1.599 or so billion Islam followers not engaging in terrorism?

Therefore, there must be other factors other than adherence to Islam

fed up sick and tired wrote: »

This is all complete bullsh1t.

Your conclusions do not follow from your premises for a start, but apart from that you just lack information.

Inform yourself.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

Do you think the Westboro Church do and say the things they do and say because they are Christian?

They say it's because they are Christian. They say it's because they have interpreted the bible correctly.

Is it therefore true to say that their 'only common denominator' is Christianity?

If a non-Christian were to point to the Westboro church and say, 'the only common denominator these people have is Christianity', would you find that acceptable?

The crazy comes first, derived from an array of elements, the justification text, be it religious or secular, comes second.

stefanovich · 19-03-2016 08:01AM

ArtSmart wrote: »

Do you think the Westboro Church do and say the things they do and say because they are Christian?

They say it's because they are Christian. They say it's because they have interpreted the bible correctly.

Is it therefore true to say that their 'only common denominator' is Christianity?

If a non-Christian were to point to the Westboro church and say, 'the only common denominator these people have is Christianity', would you find that acceptable?

The crazy comes first, derived from an array of elements, the justification text, be it religious or secular, comes second.

The glaring difference is that a significant minority of muslims are the crazy type and the rest don't condemn them.

Jack Killian · 19-03-2016 08:03AM

stefanovich wrote: »

The glaring difference is that a significant minority of muslims are the crazy type and the rest don't condemn them.

Sweeping generalisations much ?

walshyn93 · 19-03-2016 08:05AM

ArtSmart wrote: »

Do you think the Westboro Church do and say the things they do and say because they are Christian?

They say it's because they are Christian. They say it's because they have interpreted the bible correctly.

Is it therefore true to say that their 'only common denominator' is Christianity?

If a non-Christian were to point to the Westboro church and say, 'the only common denominator these people have is Christianity', would you find that acceptable?

The crazy comes first, derived from an array of elements, the justification text, be it religious or secular, comes second.

No the common denominator is that they're all members of the same family.

walshyn93 · 19-03-2016 08:08AM

Jack Killian wrote: »

Sweeping generalisations much ?

Watch this andyou'll see something very unique. An actual moderate Muslim who understands extremism challenging a pretend moderate Muslim. Once you're satisfied that Maajid nawaz is what a moderate Muslim should sound like go have a look at what all Muslims and leftists in the media have to say about him. It's not pretty. He's essentially an outcast for simply challenging the dogma in a was that would be fairly routine for most Christians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9hgUc0t9r0

stefanovich · 19-03-2016 08:14AM

walshyn93 wrote: »

Watch this andyou'll see something very unique.

Unfortunately because the video contains Tommy Robinson it will go unwatched by many. They don't like listening to him because the fact that he makes sense disturbs their fragile sensibilities.

ArtSmart · 19-03-2016 08:19AM

walshyn93 wrote: »

No the common denominator is that they're all members of the same family.

aye, funnily enough (not funny) that's how KKK members describe themselves - one big family.

Yeah. Kinda thought I might be wasting me aul pearls.

Ok, out for good this time. (honestly)

walshyn93 · 19-03-2016 08:30AM

stefanovich wrote: »

Unfortunately because the video contains Tommy Robinson it will go unwatched by many. They don't like listening to him because the fact that he makes sense disturbs their fragile sensibilities.

He's only in it for a fraction of a second anyway.

Nodin · 19-03-2016 08:50AM

Billy86 wrote: »

If someone says 'the Irish will kill you' do you assume the IRA?

But anyway, you know who could help us with this?

Nodin!

Dear Nodin,

When you sarcastically quipped "muslims are out to kill us all and they are under your bed" did you mean to sarcastically infer all Muslims are out to get us thus taking the p*ss out of that mindset some seem to have? Or, did you mean to sarcastically infer that only certain Muslims are out to get us but not all, in order to take the p*ss out of the posters on here who do not consider Muslims to be terrorists etc by default?

Best regards,
Billy.

Dear Billy,

Thank you for your missive. I did indeed intend the former proposition.

Yours in Christ,
Nodin.

Nodin · 19-03-2016 08:54AM

stefanovich wrote: »

Unfortunately because the video contains Tommy Robinson it will go unwatched by many. They don't like listening to him because the fact that he makes sense disturbs their fragile sensibilities.

No, its because a verminous scuzz bag who, were he around in the 1970's, would be chucking bricks at Pakistanis.

stefanovich wrote:

The glaring difference is that a significant minority of muslims are the
crazy type and the rest don't condemn them.

....except when they have condemned them, in which case not enough of them have, they didn't condemn them enough, or "taqqiya".

stefanovich · 19-03-2016 08:58AM

Nodin wrote: »

No, its because a verminous scuzz bag who, were he around in the 1970's, would be chucking bricks at Pakistanis.

This opinion is based on what exactly? Your prejudice?

Nodin wrote: »

....except when they have condemned them, in which case not enough of them have, they didn't condemn them enough, or "taqqiya".

The silence in the general muslim population is deafening.

Nodin · 19-03-2016 09:04AM

stefanovich wrote: »

This opinion is based on what exactly? Your prejudice?.

No, his.

stefanovich wrote: »

The silence in the general muslim population is deafening.

"Nearly 70,000 Indian Muslim clerics have signed a fatwa against Isis and other terror groups saying they were "not Islamic organisations".
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/70000-indian-muslim-clerics-issue-fatwa-against-isis-the-taliban-al-qaida-and-other-terror-groups-a6768191.html

"Australia's leading imams have backed a fatwa against the Islamic State terrorist group, warning that any support for the group contradicts Islamic teachings.
In a New Year message to the nation's Muslim community, the Grand Mufti of Australia together with prominent imams from NSW and Victoria have given their religious opinions and urged congregations, particularly the youth, to listen to their religious leaders."
http://www.smh.com.au/national/muslim-leaders-including-the-grand-mufti-of-australia-back-fatwa-against-isis-20160101-glxtbp.html

"U.S. Muslim Religious Council Issues Fatwa Against Terrorism"
http://www.icna.org/u-s-muslim-religious-council-issues-fatwa-against-terrorism/

"Muslim leaders have issued a fatwa condemning British jihadists.
The fatwa prohibits would-be jihadists from joining the “oppressive and tyrannical” Islamic State (Isis) in Iraq and Syria, the Sunday Times reported. It said the imams had ordered Muslims to oppose the promotion of the “poisonous ideology” of Isis in the UK.
Six senior Islamic scholars have endorsed the fatwa, the first of its kind issued in the UK, describing Britons allied to Islamic State cells as “heretics”.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/31/british-muslim-leaders-fatwa-jihadists-islamic-state-isis

I suggest that the problem lies in your deafness rather than their silence. Still, I await the usual shifting of goalposts with interest.

stefanovich · 19-03-2016 09:20AM

Nodin wrote: »

No, his.

"Nearly 70,000 Indian Muslim clerics have signed a fatwa against Isis and other terror groups saying they were "not Islamic organisations".
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/70000-indian-muslim-clerics-issue-fatwa-against-isis-the-taliban-al-qaida-and-other-terror-groups-a6768191.html

"Australia's leading imams have backed a fatwa against the Islamic State terrorist group, warning that any support for the group contradicts Islamic teachings.
In a New Year message to the nation's Muslim community, the Grand Mufti of Australia together with prominent imams from NSW and Victoria have given their religious opinions and urged congregations, particularly the youth, to listen to their religious leaders."
http://www.smh.com.au/national/muslim-leaders-including-the-grand-mufti-of-australia-back-fatwa-against-isis-20160101-glxtbp.html

"U.S. Muslim Religious Council Issues Fatwa Against Terrorism"
http://www.icna.org/u-s-muslim-religious-council-issues-fatwa-against-terrorism/

"Muslim leaders have issued a fatwa condemning British jihadists.
The fatwa prohibits would-be jihadists from joining the “oppressive and tyrannical” Islamic State (Isis) in Iraq and Syria, the Sunday Times reported. It said the imams had ordered Muslims to oppose the promotion of the “poisonous ideology” of Isis in the UK.
Six senior Islamic scholars have endorsed the fatwa, the first of its kind issued in the UK, describing Britons allied to Islamic State cells as “heretics”.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/31/british-muslim-leaders-fatwa-jihadists-islamic-state-isis

I suggest that the problem lies in your deafness rather than their silence. Still, I await the usual shifting of goalposts with interest.

How progressive of them. Condemning ISIS. How many are still okay with stoning people to death, chopping off people's hands for theft, subjugation of women? How many support Shariah?

In your first link they are Sufis who in your average Muslim's eyes are not real Muslims.

stefanovich · 19-03-2016 09:23AM

IN your third link they quote the Koran.

"Whoever kills a person [unjustly]…it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind." (Qur’an, 5:32)

I like the convenient "unjustly". I reckon the definition of just killing is quite wide.

stefanovich · 19-03-2016 09:26AM

stefanovich wrote: »

IN your third link they quote the Koran.

I like the convenient "unjustly". I reckon the definition of just killing is quite wide.

And we find out what they mean in the next verse.

[FONT=times new roman,times]YUSUFALI: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; [/FONT]

volchitsa · 19-03-2016 09:29AM

stefanovich wrote: »

IN your third link they quote the Koran.

I like the convenient "unjustly". I reckon the definition of just killing is quite wide.

There's another problem too, I read somewhere that the word used for "person" can also be interpreted as a member of the community, i.e. a fellow Muslim. It would certainly explain how Islamists can kill so many innocent people in those raids in Kenya and Mali etc. they burned children alive in huts FFS in the name of their religion.

and does nobody else wondr every time theres a female suicide bomber in those same regions whether it's not some of those girls who were kidnapped in various raids being used as ammunition?

fed up sick and tired · 19-03-2016 11:49AM

ArtSmart wrote: »

The crazy comes first, derived from an array of elements, the justification text, be it religious or secular, comes second.

No Islam, no Islamic State. End of.

cournioni · 19-03-2016 12:11PM

My opinion is:

Islam is bad and is a poisonous ideology. Christianity is bad and is a poisonous ideology.

In general, religion is bad and poisonous.

On the issue of Tommy Robinson, having listened to him, I can see many parallels with what he says and what the late Christopher Hitchens said about Islam in the past. The only difference being that Robinson never really denounced Christianity whereas Hitchens openly criticized Christianity, Islam and all other religious ideologies.

turnikett1 · 19-03-2016 12:14PM

fed up sick and tired wrote: »

No Islam, no Islamic State. End of.

Instead, we'd have some other terrorist organization fighting in the name of some other extremist ideology. Do you really not see the links between western colonization, exploitation, bombings and radical terrorists?

The mere fact that Islam exists doesn't mean it's inevitable that terrorist groups exist too. It's an Abrahamic religion which is no different or any less violent and repressive as Christianity or Judaism. The difference is that Christians and to an extent Jews control the world, and that Muslims are the ones who've had to suffer. I'm obviously not defending ISIS but I think it's silly to simply declare "Islam is the root of terrorism. No Islam, no problem". If in another world the Islamic world had become the world's colonizing industrial technological power, and Europe's nations and people were colonized and exploited, then you would equally see impoverished disgruntled Europeans clinging onto some pan-Christian identity, committing acts of terrorism in the name of a new Reconquista.

Anyways, I've seen a lot of people online claim that it was staged, and that it's fake... why does everything have to be a conspiracy theory!? Not that I believe everything governments tell me but c'mon... Then again ISIS really could be an intentionally designed US creation, the Paris attacks really could be an inside job and this arrest right here could be staged. Who knows? I just highly doubt it is all

JPNelsforearm · 19-03-2016 12:18PM

Local "Belgians" who presumably sheltered Salah Abdeslam in Molenbeek gather to express their displeasure at the police for arresting said terrorist.

https://twitter.com/thomas_casa/status/710879946449821696

https://twitter.com/KaplanBen_Fr/status/711147289520300032

https://twitter.com/RogerHalsted/status/711145832662355968

https://twitter.com/hashtag/molenbeek?f=tweets&vertical=news&src=hash

https://twitter.com/hashtag/molenbeek?f=tweets&vertical=news&src=hash

Obviously the only way to solve this is more Islamic immigration

Shootings in Paris - MOD NOTE UPDATED - READ OP

Comments