Jump to content

Paris shooting. 17 dead

Recommended Posts

Practically speaking, and on the condition that their culpability is factually proven to the extent that a jury would guilt them in a clinch, then that line would be "once they have outlived their useability as a source of intelligence": the problem with locking up all and sundry Muslims for just-about-thought-crimes, as some suggest, is that intelligence services would lose their data-collecting sources and nexuses (nexii?) and constantly restart afresh with little to no leads. I trust you see the fundamental problem with that.

 

That is the debate I think we need to have i.e. where is the line drawn? The last thing we need is for the State to be given 'thought police' powers but we need to do something to reverse the Islamic extremism problem or there will be a violent culture clash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you can justify people being killed for having a laugh ... Well I am surprised (not)

 

the poppy burners right to offend is back in their home countries.

the same for the luton soldiers homecoming protesters.

 

I would like to remind all UK citizens particularly those that chose to become one;

 

Oath of allegiance

I (name) swear by Almighty God that on becoming a British citizen, I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her Heirs and Successors, according to law.

 

 

Affirmation of allegiance

I (name) do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that on becoming a British citizen, I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her Heirs and Successors, according to law.

 

 

Pledge

I will give my loyalty to the United Kingdom and respect its rights and freedoms. I will uphold its democratic values. I will observe its laws faithfully and fulfil my duties and obligations as a British citizen.

 

Any person who has become a uk citizen that does not act as someone that believes in the above is either a liar or a traitor and should be deported.

.

.

 

I wouldn't sign that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.

 

Sadly, you went for gun control. What could be a better advert for the need for worldwide gun control than this barbarism?

 

So, you fail. Sorry.

 

I disagree with you completely on your narrow perception of the advantages of gun control.

 

If everyone in that office, or the local streets, had been carrying a personal fire-arm how many of them would be still alive? And how many of the kill for thrills guys would still be in a position to kill again.

.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with you completely on your narrow perception of the advantages of gun control.

 

If everyone in that office, or the local streets, had been carrying a personal fire-arm how many of them would be still alive? And how many of the kill for thrills guys would still be in a position to kill again.

.

.

 

That's a very naive viewpoint. If everyone in Paris went around armed there'd be more deaths from gunfire not fewer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe the Luton protesters should have been shot....would that have been a proportional response to them being offensive?

 

that would have been perfectly acceptable according to their teachings:roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you can justify people being killed for having a laugh ... Well I am surprised (not)

 

the poppy burners right to offend is back in their home countries.

the same for the luton soldiers homecoming protesters.

 

I would like to remind all UK citizens particularly those that chose to become one;

 

Oath of allegiance

I (name) swear by Almighty God that on becoming a British citizen, I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her Heirs and Successors, according to law.

 

 

Affirmation of allegiance

I (name) do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that on becoming a British citizen, I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her Heirs and Successors, according to law.

 

 

Pledge

I will give my loyalty to the United Kingdom and respect its rights and freedoms. I will uphold its democratic values. I will observe its laws faithfully and fulfil my duties and obligations as a British citizen.

 

Any person who has become a uk citizen that does not act as someone that believes in the above is either a liar or a traitor and should be deported.

.

.

 

I'm an atheist that also has zero respect for the Monarchy,so should I be leaving by your reckoning?

Where will I go?:gag:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sheria and the Koran are part of Islamic culture.

 

Under Sharia, those who insult Muhammad or Allah are to be executed. So are those who desecrate the Qur'an or commit other acts of blasphemy. This tradition began with Muhammad, as recorded in the Hadith and by his biographers. There is also a Quranic basis for it.

 

Qur'an (6:93) - "Who can be more wicked than one who inventeth a lie against Allah?" If the death penalty is prescribed for lesser crime, then it stands to reason that it should be imposed for the most "wicked".

 

Qur'an (33:57) - "Lo! those who malign Allah and His messenger, Allah hath cursed them in this world and the Hereafter, and hath prepared for them the doom of the disdained"

 

Qur'an (33:61) - [continues from above] "Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter."

 

From the Hadith:

 

 

 

Bukhari (59:369) - This recounts the murder of Ka'b bin al-Ashraf, a Jewish poet who wrote verses about Muslims that Muhammad found insulting. He asked his followers, 'Who will rid me of this man?' and several volunteered. al-Ashraf was stabbed to death while fighting for his life.

 

 

 

Bukhari (3:106) - "The Prophet said, "Do not tell a lie against me for whoever tells a lie against me (intentionally) then he will surely enter the Hell-fire."

 

 

 

Bukhari (4:241) - Those who mocked Muhammad at Mecca were killed after he had retaken the city and asserted his authority.

 

 

 

The above Islamic texts definitely appears to justify the action.

 

If the killers would like to justify their actions. then rather than presume they are able to act on the behalf of allah or mohammed if they were to produce some evidence that either of these people (fictional or otherwise) were actually offended and are not powerful enough to be above such things I would then at least be able to admit the cartoons caused offence..

 

But not the killings that they envoked, they were sarried out simply to give the killers a few minutes fame.

.

 

.

.

Edited by Tommo68

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's a very naive viewpoint. If everyone in Paris went around armed there'd be more deaths from gunfire not fewer.

 

hardly niave, i would guess there will be in the future far more people arming themselves to some extent as these attacks increase!!...and they will...in europe and here in England, where next nobody knows but it will happen, internment is the only answer for known inciters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hardly niave, i would guess there will be in the future far more people arming themselves to some extent as these attacks increase!!...and they will...in europe and here in England, where next nobody knows but it will happen, internment is the only answer for known inciters.

 

Compare murder rates with the states and get back to me. And who is to say any of the employees would want to carry a gun? The policemen did as far as I know and it didn't help him much. I dont want to live in country where a trip down the shops could end up like the ok coral because a few tooled up but ultimately untrained gun owners thought they'd have a go. We don't do that in the Uk. You want that, go and live in Texas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sibon
I disagree with you completely on your narrow perception of the advantages of gun control.

 

If everyone in that office, or the local streets, had been carrying a personal fire-arm how many of them would be still alive? And how many of the kill for thrills guys would still be in a position to kill again.

.

.

 

The Parisian police are all armed, many of them heavily. It didn't seem to make any difference, or help them.

 

More guns lead to more shootings. It is a simple equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Freedom of speech does not allow an atmosphere of cohesiveness and harmony within society.

 

Nor does putting a bullet in some one or cutting their head off. Speech doesn't kill.

 

It actually gives rise to conflict- how can the right to offend be any good?

 

Only if your conflict is physical can it be physically harmful.

 

What does it produce? Can we go around swearing and insulting people with smiles on our faces not expecting a reaction?

 

A reaction yes, murdered in cold blood no.

 

Not justifying the killings here btw.

 

Glad to hear it because it cant be.

 

It is this line of intellectual discourse we should undertake to highlight that this false value and belief is incorrect and counterproductive to produce a peaceful society.

 

Peaceful societies are born from inner and self criticism which applies to all.

 

In fact Charlie Hebdo sacked an employee for anti-semitism not long ago, what happened to free speech there?:|

 

Sacked because of rascism. Hebdo emphasized the inequalities of religion..right across the political and religious spectrum. You would have a point if Hebdo was bias towards a specific only.

Edited by ronthenekred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Islamic terrorists are Muslims following the religion of Islam, they follow it to the letter without ignoring verses of the Koran, this gives them the justification to commit atrocities. If Islam was not in their life it is very likley that they would not be killing people, certainly not for drawing cartoons of a man.

 

 

I tend to disagree and I honestly believe;

 

These killers just use their religion and their interpretation of the quoran to justify their desire to kill. It makes them feel important or powerful in some way. If they had no relgion or quoran they would find some other excuse to kill.

.

.

 

---------- Post added 09-01-2015 at 16:23 ----------

 

Yes I am aware of that but like you I do not know for how long or how many have been released.

 

Charlie Hebdo suspects apparently have terror convictions, the question then is how long can we lock someone up for being a terror suspect and does locking them up change their mindset, will they still want to commit acts of terror after their release.

 

If they have terror convictions I see no need to consider how long they should be kept locked up until their particular brand of terrorism has been eradicated.

 

Though I would much prefer we brick up their cells and forget we have them in custody at all for a few years.

.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.