"Muslims must be held responsible for France terror attacks"

[LuisDantas]

of course that you are wrong
just two question to know that you are wrong :
who are fighting ISIS/ISL/Nusrah in Syria and Iraq on the ground , are not the Muslims? and Who supported ISIS/ISL/Nusrah by the name supporting rebels against Bashar regime ?

I am traveling , i will reply next time .
good bye

I do not dispute that Muslims are fighting ISIS/ISIL/IS in Syria and Iraq militarily, but I fail to see how that is evidence against what I said.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

Brelvik killed humans in the name of Christ and Bible. Weird that CNN and BBC calls him Massmurder and not christian Terrorist.

Thats why iam saying there is conspiracy against islam by disbelievers.
The sad thing is that by doing so they force moderate muslims to become radicals.
When jews illegal settlars or zionist army kills muslims, no one speaks of Jewish terrorism or Radical Judaism.

This complot is already mentioned in Hadith prophecy.

Thawdan (RAT) narrated "Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, said, ‘Imminently, there will come a time when the nations gather against you, just as people gather around a feast.’ A man said, ‘Will it be because we are few at that time, O Allah’s Messenger?’ He responded, ‘No, you will be numerous in those times, but you will be as useless as the scum of the sea, and Allah will remove the fear that your enemies used to posses from you from their chests, and He will place al-Wahn in your hearts’, it was said, ‘What is al-Wahn?’, he responded, ‘Love of life, and hatred of death.’” [Ahmad, Abu Dawud]


You see this complot clearly visible within UN. They are around tables as if they having great feast. But infact they are complotting against the muslims. We saw this in 2001 and 2003 legalizing the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. And those with Veto powers are the most agressive in animosity against the muslims. USA, Russia, China and others using Veto power. USA, UK and France uses veto to protect zionist regime.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Jeffrey Dahmer the serial killer was a Christian, do we hold all Christians responsible for what he did? Adolf Hitler was Christian, do we hold Christianity responsible for the holocaust?

Pol Pot was buddist, so are the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge the responsibility of Buddists?

I would say, no.

Did Mr. Dammer point to the bible and justify his action by his religious beliefs?

Hitler, indeed did justify his actions biblically. And it is a crime against humanity that the parts of christianity which do lend themselves to to horrors are glossed over as 'not representative of the average christian' at best.

So you would like to gloss over the fact that these terrorists DO use their religion to justify their actions? And you would prefer to pretend that there is nothing a TURE muslim could interpret as calling for violent, rather then examining those aspects of a 1000 year old ideology of jihad and seeing if maybe, just maybe, there is something worthy of dialouge?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

NOTHING , and suppose all Muslims represent their rejection opinions to these pictures y peacefull way, that's it .

btw :
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) him self insulted and stoned , he did not revenge, instead the prayed to his abusor
maybe God guide them to straight way .

If the Qur'an is so clear on the matter, why do Muslim scholars get it wrong so often?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

What puzzles me is why do those calling themselves Muslims and killing the innocent have the false idea that the Prophet needs their terrorist acts to defend his honor? It is mentioned all over the place in the Islamic heritage that the Prophet told other Muslims to never hurt those who hurt him or bad mouthed him. Why do they base their acts on some out-of-context or governed-with-other-rules sources they learned in an impulse and think they suddenly became saints knowing everything, as a justification for their acts?

If you wanna use the Quran, use it as a whole comprehensive and cohesive unit. Don't just cherry pick what you want.

If Muslims want to do the Prophet a favor at the times of peace, they should do it in a good friendly way and drop it if it does not work.

Very good post! But we cannot lose sight that, right or wrong, the quran IS being used to justify these action. Part of the confusion for westerners, I believe, is that we here the quran can't be used to justify such things, but we see that it is.

The facts contradict the claims.

This is important, do you agree? That to increase understanding, we must increase examination. I have heard many muslims say 'this is not islam' and I have heard many muslims say 'this is islam.'

I have seen that this is islam, at least it is the islam of some.

I would prefer to examine, and yes that means questioning and even finding fault, the parts of islam that DO justify this violence.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Brelvik killed humans in the name of Christ and Bible. Weird that CNN and BBC calls him Massmurder and not christian Terrorist.

Breivik was convicted of terrorism.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

The verses are applied when there is war between armies or agencies. To ambush the kuffar soldiers and to wait in siege for them in every corner. This is enforced on the battlefield. Or in insurgency, when the enemy prevailed but the muslims didnt give up yet. We see this in Afghanistan, Chechnia and China. In such situations the mujahideen are allowed to hit the enemy with insurgency tactics, but without harming the non-combatants.
As for the armies and agencies of the enemy they are prepared to die for their own cause, if they didnt they wouldnt occupy muslim lands...
Jihad has strict rules.
How can these jihadists claim they follow prophet pbuh when they break the rules. Not to harm non-combatants. Their sick interpretation allows them to kill 100 people with suicide bombing, just because they want to get ridd of one 'apostate official' (Govt official from muslim countries)or disbeliever.
This is visible in lands as Somalia and Nigeria. Boko and alshabab wants to kill a muslim govt official with bombing, in the act other muslims are killed. They say these muslim victums goes to paradise they are colleteral damage, the official goes to hell, their socalled mujahid goes to paradise.
Very disturbing interpretation of islam.

Servent_of_the_One,

While your reading of the texts makes perfect sense to you, the terrorists reading make perfect sense to them! This is the nature of the written word. And it is no where more apparent than in ancient religious texts. While many, even most, muslims may condemn these actions, Islam has been used for centuries to justify such things. And at times, as opinion shifts left to right and back, these interpretations we now call extreme have formerly been mainstream.

I hope that all peoples find joy and satisfaction in life. And if you find it in islam then peace to you. But I hope that see and understand, that the very thing that gives peace, gives reason for violence to others. This is the reality of what is happening.

 

[Harikrish]

France is alone in protecting the rights of hate speech at any cost and wrong by not drawing the difference between hate speech and free speech. Inciting violence by mocking and ridiculing the prophet is hate speech and should be seen as such.

New UK law would ban critics of Sharia from broadcasting, protesting or even posting messages on Facebook
New UK law would ban critics of Sharia from broadcasting, protesting or even posting messages on Facebook - via King Dave - Newsvine

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

the Muslims declare war is in defence , there is not attack "abuse" , the argument most of preaching Islam is the past was without war .

IF they attack they would be wrong and sinners . ISIS and IS and Nusrah ....etc break many rules(verses) in Islam .

accuatly maybe you ignore that the Muslims whom on the ground fought ISIS not the Westerns ,....etc , I can't say if they are Muslims or not , but for sure their acts is against Islam ,

so that's why we fought them .
Syria army are Muslims are on the ground fought ISIS, Iraqi Army are Muslims are on the ground fought ISIS, and Alkurds are Muslims are on the ground fought ISIS

Check this video

I appreciate your post. I appreciate that those fighting ISIS are muslim. But they are fighting one form of islam against another. If the armies of syria, iraq, etc win, then islam will mean what it means to them. What if ISIS wins? Islam will mean war and subjugation. In 100 years when all who oppose are dead, islam will mean peace again.

ISLAM means what those withe the most guns say it means? Many years after the war, islam will mean peace. But when someone says we want to fight, look at the book, islam means war; like now!

There must be war between those who fight for islam to mean peace and those who fight for islam to mean war.
I

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

only the terrorists whom suppose to have answer , but i guess because they support ISIS .

IF it's true Islam teaching hate against non-Muslims , then Why all Muslims don't adopt this , and staring killing innocent non-Mulsims around the world ?

btw ,do you know that ;there are 6 millions Muslims lived in France , so 3 people represent 6 millions ?

in W1, W2 the Nazi cost the world about 70 millions innocents , so the Christianity and ALL Christians are blamed because Nazis were Christians ?

I agree with you that islam does not mean hate to most muslims. But look at your argument; if islam means hate, why not all muslims adopt this? I could just as easily say; if islam means peace, why not all muslims adopt this?

It is because the teachings of islam are inconsistent. This is the problem. It is not a problem just with islam, but with ALL religions with a book. You read it your way, these others read it their way. Different muslims see different messages because the book has different meanings.

 

[Flankerl]

Brelvik killed humans in the name of Christ and Bible.

That's simply not true.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Breivik was convicted of terrorism.

I seem to recall he was far-right, possibly white supremacist?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Since ISIS ...etc are groups "minority" and we fought them on the ground , that my good "act" answer ,if we surrender to them and we accept them , in that time you would abosultly right .


I am curious if France was a Muslims country , would the world made this media impact .

Good point. I should hope so.

"Ra'if Badawy, has been in prison in Saudi Arabia since 2012 for disrespecting Islam. At first, he was sentenced to execution for being an apostate. In May, his sentence was reduced to 10 years in prison, a fine of $100,000 and 1,000 lashes. He is to be lashed 50 times each Friday after prayers until it reaches 1,000 lashes."

Ra'if has received the first 50 lashes 3 days ago. He will receive 950 more, if he lives, over the next 19 weeks. His crime? He used the internet to criticize religious officials and suggested that Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University had become "a den for terrorists."

He has received the following honors and awards.

• Awarded the Aikenhead Award 2015 of Scottish Secular Society. [24]

• Awarded the One Humanity Award 2014 From PEN Canada. [25]

• Awarded the Netizen Prize of Reporters without Borders 2014. [26]

• Honorary Member of PEN Canada. [25]

• Individual Freedom Party (P-LIB) nomination him of Freedom Award each year gives the Liberal International 2014.[27]

• Nominated him for the 2014 International Publishers Association’s Freedom to Publish Prize. [25]

What does this mean? To me it means that if went to Saudi I would be imprisoned and given 1000 lashes, FOR HAVING AN OPINION?

Are these good muslims? They beat a man the rest of the world respects. These are not ISIS! These are not extremists! These are GOOD muslims. And their penalties ARE BASED ON SHARIA, which is BASED ON QURAN.


I agree this is not a war of east verses west, and it is not a war of christianity verses islam. It is not even a war of theism verses atheism.

This is a war of modernity verses barbarism.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

NOTHING , and suppose all Muslims represent their rejection opinions to these pictures y peacefull way, that's it .

btw :
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) him self insulted and stoned , he did not revenge, instead the prayed to his abusor
maybe God guide them to straight way .

And yet the quran say (not interpret, just say) spread rumors...be massacred completely.

33:60
to top

Sahih International
If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is disease and those who spread rumors in al-Madinah do not cease, We will surely incite you against them; then they will not remain your neighbors therein except for a little.33:61
to top

Sahih International
Accursed wherever they are found, [being] seized and massacred completely.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

France is alone in protecting the rights of hate speech at any cost and wrong by not drawing the difference between hate speech and free speech. Inciting violence by mocking and ridiculing the prophet is hate speech and should be seen as such.

New UK law would ban critics of Sharia from broadcasting, protesting or even posting messages on Facebook
New UK law would ban critics of Sharia from broadcasting, protesting or even posting messages on Facebook - via King Dave - Newsvine

So...the terrorists would win... And this proves that Islam thinks people who SPEAK or WRITE or DRAW should be killed.

 

[Harikrish]

There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. The number of Muslims who are punished in public are few. But they are severely punished to make Muslims worldwide heed the prophets teachings. They are all designed to create a better society which is the goal of Islam.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. The number of Muslims who are punished in public are few. But they are severely punished to make Muslims worldwide heed the prophets teachings. They are all designed to create a better society which is the goal of Islam.

Yes, without barbaric beating, no one would believe the rubbish of islam. Without killing, no one would fear. Without war, islam is dead.

 

[Riverwolf]

More extreme than pictures of dismembered fetuses? Many congregations in "mainstream" denominations have anti-abortion protest groups that stand around on street corners showing these sorts of things.

IMO, the WBC's emotional attacks on non-believers aren't extreme; they're right within the "mainstream" range for a religious group. Their focus on soldiers is a bit unique, but that's really it. And even that doesn't make them worse than other churches; those other churches just tend to attack people who aren't as held in as high regard as soldiers who were killed in war.

Well, I can't really agree, simply based on the emotional impact their protests have on people I know, personally.

Honestly, I think we have different standards of "extremism". I do appreciate you questioning my application of "extremism" to them, seeing as they're nonviolent and comparatively tame next to other extremists, and I don't want to throw the term around needlessly. But in this case, I do stand by it.

 

[Harikrish]

So...the terrorists would win... And this proves that Islam thinks people who SPEAK or WRITE or DRAW should be killed.

There would be no Islamic jihadists if the infidels did not take liberty with Islam a religion of peace and mock their prophet Mohammed(pbuh). Why was the magazine attacked? Did they not create the situation that incited the violence. Are the people supporting freedom of speech being attacked? No, because it is not the freedom of speech that is offensive. It is what is being said against the prophet that is insulting and degrading to Muslims and martyrs have stepped up to defend their prophet. Je Suis Charlie is not a shield that can protect the foolishness of people who make a living insulting and mocking the prophet of 1.6 billion Muslims. No more than all the nuclear bombs and super power might of America could shield them from the martyrs of a different cause.
Can France afford the billions of dollars America spend on national security against the threat of Islamists? Don't insult the prophet and it will end this futility.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

There would be no Islamic jihadists if the infidels did not take liberty with Islam a religion of peace and mock their prophet Mohammed(pbuh). Why was the magazine attacked? Did they not create the situation that incited the violence. Are the people supporting freedom of speech being attacked? No, because it is not the freedom of speech that is offensive. It is what is being said against the prophet that is insulting and degrading to Muslims and martyrs have stepped up to defend their prophet. Je Suis Charlie is not a shield that can protect the foolishness of people who make a living insulting and mocking the prophet of 1.6 billion Muslims. No more than all the nuclear bombs and super power might of America could shield them from the martyrs of a different cause.
Can France afford the billions of dollars America spend on national security against the threat of Islamists? Don't insult the prophet and it will end this futility.

Don't tell me what not to do and I won't have to kick the prophet in the arse!