Acts of Terrorism megathread

[Duque de Bragança]

You may need to improve your English a spot.
I specifically said the cartoons weren't the problem, it was those who don't believe in free speech who seek to use them for their own needs.

And sure. The side of nuance and giving things thought rather than just tatting everything with the same brush is the parochial one

We are talking about a murdered teacher you ignorant parochial Little Englander islamist-collabo.

As for the language remark, given your troubles with RP, I'd suggest you don't lecture polyglot speakers.

[Josquius]

You may need to improve your English a spot.
I specifically said the cartoons weren't the problem, it was those who don't believe in free speech who seek to use them for their own needs.

And sure. The side of nuance and giving things thought rather than just tatting everything with the same brush is the parochial one

We are talking about a murderer teacher you ignorant parochial Little Englander islamist-collabo.

As for the language remark, given your troubles with RP, I'd suggest you don't lecture polyglot speakers.

Two minutes hate is done.
We moved onto discussing the broader issues around it.
Sorry but the world isn't neatly divided into the glorious defenders of freedom and the evil Islamic murderer lovers. It is actually possible to have an opinion other than kill all Muslims without being an "islamist collabo"

(incidentally yours is the little englander view)

[Razgovory]

You may need to improve your English a spot.
I specifically said the cartoons weren't the problem, it was those who don't believe in free speech who seek to use them for their own needs.

And sure. The side of nuance and giving things thought rather than just tatting everything with the same brush is the parochial one

We are talking about a murderer teacher you ignorant parochial Little Englander islamist-collabo.

As for the language remark, given your troubles with RP, I'd suggest you don't lecture polyglot speakers.

So Donald, you worried about the polls?  Biden is pretty strong in Pennsylvania.

[Duque de Bragança]

You may need to improve your English a spot.
I specifically said the cartoons weren't the problem, it was those who don't believe in free speech who seek to use them for their own needs.

And sure. The side of nuance and giving things thought rather than just tatting everything with the same brush is the parochial one

We are talking about a murderer teacher you ignorant parochial Little Englander islamist-collabo.

As for the language remark, given your troubles with RP, I'd suggest you don't lecture polyglot speakers.

Two minutes hate is done.
We moved onto discussing the broader issues around it.
Sorry but the world isn't neatly divided into the glorious defenders of freedom and the evil Islamic murderer lovers. It is actually possible to have an opinion other than kill all Muslims without being an "islamist collabo"

(incidentally yours is the little englander view)

I am as islamist as little englander, you anti-French bigot chav. Seems you actually need to improve your English a spot (Trump-like projecting on somebody who disagrees with you) , not just RP, since I never said anything about killing all muslims. I mentioned islamists, but then you would have to know how to read and understand the difference between those terms.

Collabos come in many kinds.

[Eddie Teach]

If your reaction to an Islamist killing a school teacher over cartoons is to bemoan far right white supremacists, you give off the impression of being an apologist, just a tad. Their suckitude isn't always relevant.

[Josquius]

Your view does more to help Islamists than mine
Encouraging your view is exactly their mission in conducting terror attacks.

[Valmy]

Your view does more to help Islamists than mine
Encouraging your view is exactly their mission in conducting terror attacks.

I don't think the terrorist attacks have much to do with us. They are about controlling other Muslims.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

If your reaction to an Islamist killing a school teacher over cartoons is to bemoan far right white supremacists, you give off the impression of being an apologist, just a tad. Their suckitude isn't always relevant.

such reactions fit in nicely with the department of salami tactics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salami_tactics
It's like using 'islamophobia': a term who's only raison d'être is to silence any and all opposition to islam.

[crazy canuck]

If your reaction to an Islamist killing a school teacher over cartoons is to bemoan far right white supremacists, you give off the impression of being an apologist, just a tad. Their suckitude isn't always relevant.

such reactions fit in nicely with the department of salami tactics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salami_tactics
It's like using 'islamophobia': a term who's only raison d'être is to silence any and all opposition to islam.

Or, you know, travel bans that make no sense.

[crazy canuck]

As to the quote, don't confuse natural freedom and civilized freedom. If I had complete natural freedom then I would be free to murder whoever I like. Civilization is built around controlling these freedoms for everyone's benefit.

I am not following your argument.  Liberal political theory, as formulated John Stuart Mill, would say that natural freedom is restricted when it causes harm to others.  Most of our modern legal tradition is built on that concept, including our concept of freedom of expression.  No one has the freedom to falsely yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre etc. 

[Razgovory]

If your reaction to an Islamist killing a school teacher over cartoons is to bemoan far right white supremacists, you give off the impression of being an apologist, just a tad. Their suckitude isn't always relevant.

such reactions fit in nicely with the department of salami tactics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salami_tactics
It's like using 'islamophobia': a term who's only raison d'être is to silence any and all opposition to islam.

Question: What term do you use to describe the motives of the Christchurch killer?

[Eddie Teach]

Your view does more to help Islamists than mine
Encouraging your view is exactly their mission in conducting terror attacks.

My view is that you are deflecting the issue at hand.

[Josquius]

I am not following your argument.  Liberal political theory, as formulated John Stuart Mill, would say that natural freedom is restricted when it causes harm to others.  Most of our modern legal tradition is built on that concept, including our concept of freedom of expression.  No one has the freedom to falsely yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre etc.

That's exactly my argument, you followed it. 
Duque however was arguing that this is not the case and that freedom of expression must be absolute with zero buts. That yelling fire in a crowded theatre is fine.

I don't think the terrorist attacks have much to do with us. They are about controlling other Muslims.

Its both. As said its a cycle of hate.
Its fairly chicken and egg and the true start is quite irrelevant, but I think looking at the timeline we can fairly say it was western actions in the middle east.
Out of this Islamic extremists then decided to fight back by attacking the west. They're not stupid, they know they won't beat the west with a bomb every few years. So they think a lot bigger picture; prick the west to encourage more Islamophobia and crack downs against Muslims in the west. This then leads to a situation where more young western Muslims feel oppressed and under attack and will sign up for radical Islam. Thus leading to more attacks and violence and racial strife thus more crackdowns against Islam.
They're all about edging the needle ever forwards, knowing the growth of far right views amongst the general population in the west will lead to growth of far right views amongst the muslim population, so on and so forth until it reaches tipping point where all the muslims of the world rally behind their banner and they get their battle of the civilizations that they're aiming for.
Incidentally the white far right also has this same ultimate goal. They want to spread their radicalization step by step with a dream of the day the nation wakes up and rallies behind their flag against 'the others'.
Its important not to give these groups what they both want or it just leads to more violence.

Your view does more to help Islamists than mine
Encouraging your view is exactly their mission in conducting terror attacks.

My view is that you are deflecting the issue at hand.

Nope.
The murderer did a bad thing.
I think we can all safely say this is accepted, its stupid to even attempt to have an argument here. Who would be that far gone into insanity as to assume somebody on here might be supportive of this?
So the discussion moved onto an area where it is possible to actually have a discussion, on the limits of free speech and how it is abused such as for instance in the lead up to this killing.
Whether free speech is absolute or there are nuances is exactly the matter at hand.

such reactions fit in nicely with the department of salami tactics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salami_tactics
It's like using 'islamophobia': a term who's only raison d'être is to silence any and all opposition to islam.

I'm really bad at remembering the proper terminology. Whats this one called again? The old "You just call anyone who disagrees with you a nazi" thing?
Silencing all opposition to Islamophobia by insisting any insinuation of Islamophobia is invalid.

Also; quite the opposite of salami tactics actually. Clumping extremists of all colours together as one horrid stinky blob that normal people should stand against.

[Valmy]

That's exactly my argument, you followed it. 
Duque however was arguing that this is not the case and that freedom of expression must be absolute with zero buts. That yelling fire in a crowded theatre is fine.

Freedom of thought and opinion and yelling fire in a crowded theatre are not the same thing.

Its both. As said its a cycle of hate.

I don't agree. I think it is about religion and fanaticism. Especially when we are talking about Pakistanis getting angry about something some French person did. Why would Pakistanis otherwise hate the French?

Its fairly chicken and egg and the true start is quite irrelevant, but I think looking at the timeline we can fairly say it was western actions in the middle east.

Well I disagree. Rules against blasphemy and apostasy and their social enforcement by fanatics is not new. And even to the extent that Islamism is a reaction to the western imperialism, that was not always so. There are plenty of ways to respond, such as Pan-Arabism.

But I don't think this is a reaction to Western imperialism so much as these cultures being opened up to outside ideas that are changing their communities and causing a crisis in their religion. The internet age is rapidly speeding this process up. I talked about this a few years ago but the trends are really accelerating now.

Out of this Islamic extremists then decided to fight back by attacking the west. They're not stupid, they know they won't beat the west with a bomb every few years. So they think a lot bigger picture; prick the west to encourage more Islamophobia and crack downs against Muslims in the west. This then leads to a situation where more young western Muslims feel oppressed and under attack and will sign up for radical Islam. Thus leading to more attacks and violence and racial strife thus more crackdowns against Islam.

I would ask for statistics showing crackdowns in the west and young people becoming more Islamic in response. Now there will always be fanatics and young people are drawn to fanaticism. But is this, in fact, what young muslims are doing?

I bring the following data to your attention:

https://www.arabbarometer.org/media-news/young-arabs-are-changing-their-beliefs-and-perceptions-new-survey/

The main findings were published by The Economist on 5 December 2019, showing that 'across the region the share of people expressing much trust in political parties, most of which have a religious tint, has fallen by well over a third since 2011, to 15 per cent. ... The doubts extend to religious leaders. In 2013, around 51 per cent of respondents said they trusted their religious leaders to a "great" or "medium" extent. When a comparable question was asked last year, the number was down to 40 per cent. ... The share of Arabs describing themselves as "not religious" is up to 13 per cent, from 8 per cent in 2013. That includes nearly half of young Tunisians, a third of young Libyans, a quarter of young Algerians and a fifth of young Egyptians.'

Interesting. This tells me Islamism is ultimately failing to do what it's real goal is and react against the encroachment of new ideas into the Muslim world. As a reactionary force it is starting to fumble.

This survey was particularly incredible:

https://iranintl.com/en/iran/iranians-have-lost-their-faith-according-survey

According to the results, 78% of Iranians believe in God, but only 26% of them believe in "the coming of the Messiah (Imam Mahdi)", which is one of the main beliefs of the Twelver Shiites.

While only 32% of Iranians consider themselves Shia Muslims, 9% have claimed to be atheists and 22% do not align with any religion. Half of the population used to believe but does not anymore and 6% have converted to a new religion.

I don't believe that. That is a mindblowing shift if true. A historic collapse of Islam in Iran. I...just...I would need to see much more conclusive proof to believe something that outside my expectations. But I will say that sometimes the best way to discredit an idea is to put it in charge, so maybe this is just the impact of decades of the Islamic State being in power. I don't know.

But it does point to a crisis. One that I don't think has much to do with the west. I mean it probably has a little to do with the west, but we are certainly not the only area outside of the Islamic world whose influence is now being felt culturally.

And these kinds of reactions against apostasy and blasphemy by those freely choosing to go their own way should be opposed, especially in our own western countries. Drawing Mohammed or doing whatever should be allowed, especially from ex-Muslims but even from those just seeking to mock or lampoon or critisize religions. Because I think that is just as important as supporting religosity.

But it is a tricky situation isn't it? Because we want to support the rights of apostates while also supporting the religious freedoms and rights of those who remain Muslims.

By the way almost everything thing I am saying and pointing out is also happening in most other religions and my opinion in those cases is the same. Religion, in general, is currently having some issues. Keeping the young people around is a struggle for everybody. 25% of children born Muslim leave Islam in the United States. That is not out of step with the rest of the religious population.

They're all about edging the needle ever forwards, knowing the growth of far right views amongst the general population in the west will lead to growth of far right views amongst the muslim population, so on and so forth until it reaches tipping point where all the muslims of the world rally behind their banner and they get their battle of the civilizations that they're aiming for.

Except they are failing, as I have demonstrated.

Incidentally the white far right also has this same ultimate goal. They want to spread their radicalization step by step with a dream of the day the nation wakes up and rallies behind their flag against 'the others'.

I agree in the sense they are also reactionary and dangerous.

Its important not to give these groups what they both want or it just leads to more violence.

I agree. Both groups must be met with criticism of their bad ideas and support and solidarity with their victims.

[Duque de Bragança]

Back to topic, the above mentioned islamist concerned parent, Brahim C., whose daughter did not attend the civic education class in question (forms and limits of freedom of speech), was contacted by the perpetrator prior to the murder. His daughter did not attend the Civics class which makes the islamist outrage about it even more spurious.

https://www.nouvelobs.com/mort-de-samuel-paty/20201019.OBS34947/ce-que-l-on-sait-de-brahim-c-le-parent-d-eleve-qui-a-lance-une-fatwa-contre-samuel-paty.html

Selon les premiers éléments de l'enquête, ce parent d'élève, à l'origine de la mobilisation sur les réseaux sociaux contre Samuel Paty, aurait été contacté par l'assassin terroriste du professeur.

A noter que l'enquête ouverte suite au dépôt de plainte pour diffusion d'images pornographiques par Brahim C. contre Samuel Paty, démontrera que sa fille n'était pas présente lors du cours dispensé le 5 octobre. Quant à son exclusion, elle serait liée à des problèmes de comportements.

The freedom of speech limits question is actually much more, if not only, about the online bashing by the concerned islamist parent, by revealing the teacher's identity an calling for mobilisation against him, as in getting him fired officially, which could be very well seen an online harassment ; and the islamist preacher that preceded the murder.