Scenes of horror as a Paris night becomes a bloodbath

[MrTee]

I hope its just a false alarm..

It must be edgy for the people of Paris

[tropo]

I don't have a problem with Muslims.

I don't like them, I don't trust them, I don't want to be near them, touch them, smell them, I don't want to look at them and I certainly don't care what happens to them. That's my feeling towards them, they are nothing absolutely nothing to me and there's no law saying I have to like them, so I'm not breaking any rules.

Have some great Muslim friends back in the UK, some of the best friends I've had. And they make fantastic food. To make a statement like "I don't want to look at them" makes you a bigot at best. Your post is a reflection on you, and you only.

Do you eat Roti? Its lovely.

You mentioned food twice... that must be why they are such good friends - you like food and they are good cooks.

How does "I don't want to look at them" make him a bigot? Bigot: a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

BTW, "Roti" is a Sangskrit word which is the primary sacred language of Hinduism. It may be eaten by Muslims, but it's not originally a Muslim food. It's India's favourite bread.

[arjunadawn]

Are u his lawyer counsellor? I'm sure he can defend himself...

edit/appendix:

There is virtually no subjective interpretation of islamic law in ages; its emphatically clear.

u must be joking.... the whole interpretation is utter-stretchable (subjective). there is no such thing as 1 uniform islam with 1 uniform law-interpretation-in-practice.

Really? "Your not the boss of me," and "are you his councellor [sic]" are grade school protests. Considering the material you wade into, you disarm yourself early. In any event, there is virtually no subjective interpretation of islamic law in ages. This is among the key element of its longevity, another being the language of the liturgy being required to be in arabic. Without question the framers sought to produce something that would withstand time and varying cultural pressures. They were quite clear in this regard and developed a highly evolved framework to ensure it. Born to muslims, muslims for life. Renounce islam, the death penalty. All legitimately adjudicated tenets, legal opinions, entered cannot be revisited. These fundamentals apply across the board. This is also among the chief reasons a reformation is a bridge too far in islam. It is desired, many seek it, but there is no mechanism to permit it. The injunctions of islam upon its adherents are emphatic, and individual or other interpretation flies boldly in the face of the divine communication of the scripture. There is zero material to support your point of view other than "I think..." "I declare..." or gaslighting the opinion over and over and over again.

The presumption that islamic law is stretchable is a convenient pablum for the community to offer the West, who is desperate to belief islam is inherently peaceful (this is not unlike the fallacy that Islam means Peace; in fact it means submission, but this is never corrected). The fact is, where emphatic islamic exegesis remotely enters the subjective mark in jurisprudence abrogation begins. Abrogation is disputed in a few places, but mostly, not. So, where there may appear to be subjective wiggle room today, in nearly every case, not only is there the doctrine of abrogation but the storied islamic evaluation secondary to the abrogation clarified most everything over millennia. There is very little that has not been exhaustively evaluated, adjudicated, and ruled on.

Because sharia is variously applied in different countries, within shia or sunni communities, or even other sects, does not change the underlying fact that they are IAW with the actual injunctions- or not, but its not a subjective interpretation. Application not interpretation. In the past years, when a jihadi cites his authority- and they do nearly every single time- there is rarely a legal rebuke because the inconvenient truth is they are nearly always spot on. The disagreeable elephant in the room is islam has variously moderated its application of sharia of the past 200 years. But this moderation is not interpretation, its application.

Within the past few years a collective of muslim activists/scholars rebuked DAESH in a public lashing in a newspaper. It was widely touted as reflecting the silent majority in islam. However, few actually understand it said very little and the things that it did state that were true were stipulated, universally understood things. Besides, the fact that it was addressed to al Baghdadi but offered in English alone demonstrates who the real audience was. Example: All fatwas or islamic rulings must be in accordance with established islamic legal exegesis, executed only be an islamic scholar, and presented in arabic. The english speaking world would presume from this that this was a point of admonishment revealing al Baghdadi's err in his islamic command. Wrong! Baghdadi is an islamic scholar and the fatwas were in arabic. It was fodder. It was an example how the entire product was for western consumption. Why? Because DAESH was substantially correct in all its islamic exegesis, the real authorizations being decided long ago and al Baghdadi only cited them.

This is the conundrum the West truly faces as we reel from this tragic blow in Paris. How do we really, finally, substantively address this modern scourge upon the plural world? Without question, unless the above bedrock foundation of the cause is addressed nothing but band-aids and further conflict will stem from Paris today. More bombs, more bullets, more oppression on Western citizens to surrender their freedoms for ostensible security, and more alienation of the mysterious silent muslim majority.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/09/international-group-of-muslim-scholars-refutes-islamic-states-islamic-case-while-endorsing-jihad-sharia-caliphate

[tribalfusion001]

I don't have a problem with Muslims.

I don't like them, I don't trust them, I don't want to be near them, touch them, smell them, I don't want to look at them and I certainly don't care what happens to them. That's my feeling towards them, they are nothing absolutely nothing to me and there's no law saying I have to like them, so I'm not breaking any rules.

100% agree. Maybe frau Merkel should reconsider her open door policy, no one voted for it or wants it!

Edited November 15, 2015 by tribalfusion001

[Linzz]

here we have the results of letting in 1000000 so-called refugees into europe.

kick merkel out of office fast....

Perspective needed? Just another point of view....

Edited November 15, 2015 by Linzz

[geriatrickid]

<deleted>!

The West is bombing, droning, supplying militants (including Isis) and fully supporting Israels illegal occupation and apartheid in he West Bank. Israel has already attached Syria following the French affair. Does that violence not register with you?

Amazing. No evidence, no reports of any Israeli activity, and yet here we see the standard strategy of deflection. When caught doing something evil, blame the jooze, blame the Satanic USA and UK.

More than 10,000 Harara Muslims now staged a rally against IS / Taliban in Kabul.

Their being muslim is not relevant. They protested because 7 of them were beheaded by an ISIS aligned group. They are are only concerned about themselves. No one and nothing else.

Does this mean more people died of panic than by the actual attacks?

???? People were targeted and executed. What part of the mass murder do you not comprehend?

Edited November 15, 2015 by geriatrickid

[cdnvic]

Removed posts in all caps and gibberish. You all were taught how to write in school. Please use those skills.

[silverado]

here we have the results of letting in 1000000 so-called refugees into europe.

kick merkel out of office fast....

Perspective needed?

you re called misguiding , misinforming , and disinforming

thank you for your post

[Patsycat]

I also think that there are nasty people coming through the borders, on boats etc. Pretending.

[Linzz]

here we have the results of letting in 1000000 so-called refugees into europe.

kick merkel out of office fast....

Perspective needed?

you re called misguiding , misinforming , and disinforming

thank you for your post

Oh cheers bud. What's in it for me to do that? As I said just another point of view. Not trying to diminish the tragedy at all and I share your outrage. But do the maths, work out the stats for yourself before you condemn 1000000 refugees who are fleeing the same terror. ISiS doesn't do this stuff because they're Muslim. They do it because they're reprobates of the lowest order and love to manipulate anti Islam opinion in the West to create chaos and they are doing a good job on you.The Shia/Sunni extremist Muslim factions hate each other with a vengeance, more than they hate unbelievers like you and me.

Thank you for your post.

[simple1]

Watching French tv, it is heartbreaking. You lot just see what is on CNN or BBC, but on French tv they are already talking to victims parents and families. Showing photos etc. just too sad. It is not just Paris that is in mourning, it is the whole of Europe.

Those bastards, whoever they are, or were. Had no right to do that. NO RIGHT.

In a normal world, people go out to restaurants and go to concerts and laugh and have fun.

They don't stand on the back of pickup trucks firing bullets at nothing, or slitting the throats of aid workers and then raping kidnapped schoolgirls.

Nor do they go to civilised cities and fire those guns into innocent people. For what? Why?

Probably shooting their guns off as we write. And doing a little dance.

The 70 virgins? more like 150 ghosts of those they killed, flying in and punching them. Over and over again. For the eternity of their "martyred" lives. one ever millisecond. Hopefully. And i hope their parents are real proud. But, don't worry, the parents will say "we never knew". And mama will be crying. Bullshit.

RIP to all the victims of this massacre.

Rant over.

Want ISIS Really Wants.

Putting aside worldly power and wealth, at the doctrinal level all Daesh supported actions leads to it's goal of the Apocalypse.

The Islamic State awaits the army of “Rome,” whose defeat at Dabiq, Syria, will initiate the countdown to the apocalypse.

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

France has already commenced airstrikes against Deash facilities in Raqqa, hopefully doesn't take too long for coordinated ground attacks to militarily destroy Daesh; underpinned by the equally essential political solution for stabilisation of Syria & Iraq - wishful thinking?

[Linky]

No, the muslim lady asked what the west was doing to eradicate extremism. Not verbatim.

The host then spewed some vitriol against her and muslims about what they were or were not doing.

Not once did she answer the question.

So yes, very enlightening how to not answer a question but instead attack the questioner.

I don't know where you've been but it has been oft asked in the West 'Where are the Muslim leaders speaking out about this?' met with deafening silence. So I am asking YOU. Where are they? Perhaps you could provide a link instead of obfuscating. No? Thought not.

Perhaps you should do some searching yourself. Australias only muslim senator immediately condemned the attacks in parliament. Australias muslim leader has already been interviewed condemning the attacks. There have been many. Try looking for things yourself and prove yourself wrong instead of me having to do it.

[Linky]

Why i never saw a demonstration of muslims against terrorism?

1. because u're blind

2. because u know no muslim people u talk to, deal with, be friends with

3. because many muslims feel ashamed and mind their own business, in peace, not in public

4. because public demonstrations, according to (subjective interpretation of) islamic law, can be considered (and many muslims i know actually do consider them) "fitna" (-> google is your friend) and fitna = haram (opposite of halal).

Rubbish many Muslim demonstrate, but only when they think they have been discriminated against.

Personally I am now anti- Muslim, even though I have Muslim friends, here in the south of Thailand. I will remain anti Muslim until -

1/ I see thousands and thousands of Muslims demonstrating against these fanatics.

2/ When I see that the majority of Muslims are prepared to integrate with non- Muslims,this does not mean they have to give up on their religion, just that they will accepts other people's right to live their own way.

You tell me when these will happen.

You do realise many muslims are not only protesting against these radicals but actively hunting them down. Muslim troops are fighting against them. Thats a lot more and a lot more effective than just protesting.

[Linky]

I don't have a problem with Muslims.

I don't like them, I don't trust them, I don't want to be near them, touch them, smell them, I don't want to look at them and I certainly don't care what happens to them. That's my feeling towards them, they are nothing absolutely nothing to me and there's no law saying I have to like them, so I'm not breaking any rules.

Have some great Muslim friends back in the UK, some of the best friends I've had. And they make fantastic food. To make a statement like "I don't want to look at them" makes you a bigot at best. Your post is a reflection on you, and you only.

Do you eat Roti? Its lovely.

The funny thing is that he would look, smell, be near, trust them and wouldnt even know it. So its obvious racist instead of bigotry

[nontabury]

No, the muslim lady asked what the west was doing to eradicate extremism. Not verbatim.

The host then spewed some vitriol against her and muslims about what they were or were not doing.

Not once did she answer the question.

So yes, very enlightening how to not answer a question but instead attack the questioner.

I don't know where you've been but it has been oft asked in the West 'Where are the Muslim leaders speaking out about this?' met with deafening silence. So I am asking YOU. Where are they? Perhaps you could provide a link instead of obfuscating. No? Thought not.

Perhaps you should do some searching yourself. Australias only muslim senator immediately condemned the attacks in parliament. Australias muslim leader has already been interviewed condemning the attacks. There have been many. Try looking for things yourself and prove yourself wrong instead of me having to do it.

And where were the tens of thousands of Muslims demonstrating against these terrible acts?

[Kitsune]

At Bataclan when the raid was over and the terrorists had blown themselves up.

The police said there were dozen of bodies on the floor left and the cell phones from the victims which kept ringing non-stop,were chilling.

[tropo]

No, the muslim lady asked what the west was doing to eradicate extremism. Not verbatim.

The host then spewed some vitriol against her and muslims about what they were or were not doing.

Not once did she answer the question.

So yes, very enlightening how to not answer a question but instead attack the questioner.

She made some very good points. The Muslim lady's question was off topic, therefore a direct answer was not necessary.

[Linzz]

No, the muslim lady asked what the west was doing to eradicate extremism. Not verbatim.

The host then spewed some vitriol against her and muslims about what they were or were not doing.

Not once did she answer the question.

So yes, very enlightening how to not answer a question but instead attack the questioner.

She made some very good points. The Muslim lady's question was off topic, therefore a direct answer was not necessary.

While Gabriel makes a good point that we all have to be aware and vigilant about radical Islam, we need to balance this with facts also.

Brigitte Gabriel has claimed that Obama supports and arms radical jihadists such as ISIS, has friends that are terrorists, was raised a Muslim and studied at Muslim ashrams. All totally unsubstantiated claims .In fact his father was an atheist.Obama attended public school and a Catholic college. When claims are made that are non factual or outright fabrications then you have to wonder about the driving agenda and credibility of the speaker,even if you agree with the sentiments. Now she is called a right wing nutjob because she has damaged her own cause.

It is necessary to look behind the face of the messenger before we take the message at face value as truth and fact and then act upon it. This is precisely how Muslim's are radicalized by their own talking heads.

Both sides have their own hate speech screaming skulls.

[tropo]

No, the muslim lady asked what the west was doing to eradicate extremism. Not verbatim.

The host then spewed some vitriol against her and muslims about what they were or were not doing.

Not once did she answer the question.

So yes, very enlightening how to not answer a question but instead attack the questioner.

She made some very good points. The Muslim lady's question was off topic, therefore a direct answer was not necessary.

While Gabriel makes a good point that we all have to be aware and vigilant about radical Islam, we need to balance this with facts also.

Brigitte Gabriel has claimed that Obama supports and arms radical jihadists such as ISIS, has friends that are terrorists, was raised a Muslim and studied at Muslim ashrams. All totally unsubstantiated claims .In fact his father was an atheist.Obama attended public school and a Catholic college. When claims are made that are non factual or outright fabrications then you have to wonder about the driving agenda and credibility of the speaker,even if you agree with the sentiments. Now she is called a right wing nutjob because she has damaged her own cause.

It is necessary to look behind the face of the messenger before we take the message at face value as truth and fact and then act upon it. This is precisely how Muslim's are radicalized by their own talking heads.

Both sides have their own hate speech screaming skulls.

I know nothing about the messenger. I take what she said here at face value - her background doesn't alter what she said.

Sure, if you know anything about the messenger, then you will be biased when listening to her speak and you will probably end up with a different message.

[metisdead]

A post containing a link to a conspiracy blogspot has been removed as well as the replies.

[Linzz]

While Gabriel makes a good point that we all have to be aware and vigilant about radical Islam, we need to balance this with facts also.

Brigitte Gabriel has claimed that Obama supports and arms radical jihadists such as ISIS, has friends that are terrorists, was raised a Muslim and studied at Muslim ashrams. All totally unsubstantiated claims .In fact his father was an atheist.Obama attended public school and a Catholic college. When claims are made that are non factual or outright fabrications then you have to wonder about the driving agenda and credibility of the speaker,even if you agree with the sentiments. Now she is called a right wing nutjob because she has damaged her own cause.

It is necessary to look behind the face of the messenger before we take the message at face value as truth and fact and then act upon it. This is precisely how Muslim's are radicalized by their own talking heads.

Both sides have their own hate speech screaming skulls.

I know nothing about the messenger. I take what she said here at face value - her background doesn't alter what she said.

Sure, if you know anything about the messenger, then you will be biased when listening to her speak and you will probably end up with a different message.

Interesting logic. So in order to be neutral and unbiased you would not want to know if you could trust your wife with your money?

[tropo]

While Gabriel makes a good point that we all have to be aware and vigilant about radical Islam, we need to balance this with facts also.

Brigitte Gabriel has claimed that Obama supports and arms radical jihadists such as ISIS, has friends that are terrorists, was raised a Muslim and studied at Muslim ashrams. All totally unsubstantiated claims .In fact his father was an atheist.Obama attended public school and a Catholic college. When claims are made that are non factual or outright fabrications then you have to wonder about the driving agenda and credibility of the speaker,even if you agree with the sentiments. Now she is called a right wing nutjob because she has damaged her own cause.

It is necessary to look behind the face of the messenger before we take the message at face value as truth and fact and then act upon it. This is precisely how Muslim's are radicalized by their own talking heads.

Both sides have their own hate speech screaming skulls.

I know nothing about the messenger. I take what she said here at face value - her background doesn't alter what she said.

Sure, if you know anything about the messenger, then you will be biased when listening to her speak and you will probably end up with a different message.

Interesting logic. So in order to be neutral and unbiased you would not want to know if you could trust your wife with your money?

My logic was sound. I hear what someone says then make a decision if I agree with (or like) what that person said based on what they said.

[katana]

Even if there are some "good" muslims, we can't trust them. Since thy are a potential threat to us, we shouldn't let them into our countries.

Why i never saw a demonstration of muslims against terrorism? I don't trust them. But it's too late already. They won. RIP Europe.

Because you've never looked!

Some examples.

British Muslims stage anti-ISIS protest march in London

Muslims in Europe rally against extremist violence

Austria Muslims demonstrate against terrorism

Thousands of German Muslims protest against terrorism

Then there is the Not in my name campaign; which started in Luton and has now spread worldwide.

Also the Open Letter to Al-Baghdadi

Plus, as already said, this latest outrage has been roundly condemned by Muslims worldwide.

Paris attacks: Leading Muslims call for solidarity as thousands set to attend Trafalgar Square vigil in honour of victims

Muslims all over the world condemn terrorism, express solidarity with French

Just a quick look through some of the links. Two of the three comments in the first link:

"I would just like to point out this was not the primary objective of the march. Tuesday was the day of Ashura, when our prophet, Imam Hussein along with his family and followers were martyred in Kerbala.

This march yesterday was to mourn the loss of our prophet.

As Shia Muslims all over the world are being persecuted and murdered by ISIS, we also took this opportunity to bring this to the public eye, but this was IN NO WAY the main reason for the march, at all." - Shafiq Pradhan

"Hi Shafiq,

Thanks very much for your comment.

I have added a line to make it clear that the demonstration was part of the Day of Ashura." - Harry Cockburn (article author)

http://www.londonlovesbusiness.com/business-news/london-news/british-muslims-stage-anti-isis-protest-march-in-london/9163.article

The second link, the march was to mark holy month of Muharram and the martyrdom anniversary of Imam Hossein, Prophet Mohammad’s grandson. Tacked on the end was that this was an inspiration for today's fight against terrorism and extremism..?

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/10/19/434024/Austria-Muslims-demonstrate-against-terrorism

The 4th link

The so-called 'demonstrations' were not actually held outside in the streets but took place out of sight *inside* the mosques and included complaints against 'racists targetting the mosques'.

"Muslim organizations in Germany have held rallies in 2,000 mosques nationwide in protest against the ISIL and racist attacks targeting mosques and synagogues."

http://www.worldbulletin.net/haber/144759/thousands-of-german-muslims-protest-against-terrorism

The seventh link although it quoted Muslims speaking out against the Paris attack didn't contain details of any Muslim-organised demonstrations against them.

Leading Muslim figures called for solidarity in the wake of the Paris terror attack and for communities to remain together.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/paris-attacks-vigils-to-take-place-in-trafalgar-square-to-honour-victims-as-london-shows-solidarity-a3114481.html

Last link, again no mention of any demonstrations against the attacks.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/991351/muslims-all-over-the-world-condemn-terrorism-express-solidarity-with-french/

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[7by7]

<snip>

Within the past few years a collective of muslim activists/scholars rebuked DAESH in a public lashing in a newspaper. It was widely touted as reflecting the silent majority in islam. However, few actually understand it said very little and the things that it did state that were true were stipulated, universally understood things. Besides, the fact that it was addressed to al Baghdadi but offered in English alone demonstrates who the real audience was. Example: All fatwas or islamic rulings must be in accordance with established islamic legal exegesis, executed only be an islamic scholar, and presented in arabic. The english speaking world would presume from this that this was a point of admonishment revealing al Baghdadi's err in his islamic command. Wrong! Baghdadi is an islamic scholar and the fatwas were in arabic. It was fodder. It was an example how the entire product was for western consumption. Why? Because DAESH was substantially correct in all its islamic exegesis, the real authorizations being decided long ago and al Baghdadi only cited them.

I do not know if the newspaper article of which you speak was about the open letter I linked to earlier.

However, I do know that open letter is written in Arabic! Click here if you do not believe me.

The website it is published on has translations into many languages; for obvious reasons I linked to the English translation.

I see that your assumptions about the motives of those behind the letter comes from Jihad Watch. I could take these assumptions more seriously if they came from an independent source, rather than from people whose aim is to demonise Islam and all Muslims!

[7by7]

Even if there are some "good" muslims, we can't trust them. Since thy are a potential threat to us, we shouldn't let them into our countries.

Why i never saw a demonstration of muslims against terrorism? I don't trust them. But it's too late already. They won. RIP Europe.

Because you've never looked!

Some examples.

British Muslims stage anti-ISIS protest march in London

Muslims in Europe rally against extremist violence

Austria Muslims demonstrate against terrorism

Thousands of German Muslims protest against terrorism

Then there is the Not in my name campaign; which started in Luton and has now spread worldwide.

Also the Open Letter to Al-Baghdadi

Plus, as already said, this latest outrage has been roundly condemned by Muslims worldwide.

Paris attacks: Leading Muslims call for solidarity as thousands set to attend Trafalgar Square vigil in honour of victims

Muslims all over the world condemn terrorism, express solidarity with French

Just a quick look through some of the links. Two of the three comments in the first link:

"I would just like to point out this was not the primary objective of the march. Tuesday was the day of Ashura, when our prophet, Imam Hussein along with his family and followers were martyred in Kerbala.

This march yesterday was to mourn the loss of our prophet.

As Shia Muslims all over the world are being persecuted and murdered by ISIS, we also took this opportunity to bring this to the public eye, but this was IN NO WAY the main reason for the march, at all." - Shafiq Pradhan

"Hi Shafiq,

Thanks very much for your comment.

I have added a line to make it clear that the demonstration was part of the Day of Ashura." - Harry Cockburn (article author)

http://www.londonlovesbusiness.com/business-news/london-news/british-muslims-stage-anti-isis-protest-march-in-london/9163.article

The second link, the march was to mark holy month of Muharram and the martyrdom anniversary of Imam Hossein, Prophet Mohammad’s grandson. Tacked on the end was that this was an inspiration for today's fight against terrorism and extremism..?

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/10/19/434024/Austria-Muslims-demonstrate-against-terrorism

The 4th link

The so-called 'demonstrations' were not actually held outside in the streets but took place out of sight *inside* the mosques and included complaints against 'racists targetting the mosques'.

"Muslim organizations in Germany have held rallies in 2,000 mosques nationwide in protest against the ISIL and racist attacks targeting mosques and synagogues."

http://www.worldbulletin.net/haber/144759/thousands-of-german-muslims-protest-against-terrorism

The seventh link although it quoted Muslims speaking out against the Paris attack didn't contain details of any Muslim-organised demonstrations against them.

Leading Muslim figures called for solidarity in the wake of the Paris terror attack and for communities to remain together.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/paris-attacks-vigils-to-take-place-in-trafalgar-square-to-honour-victims-as-london-shows-solidarity-a3114481.html

Last link, again no mention of any demonstrations against the attacks.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/991351/muslims-all-over-the-world-condemn-terrorism-express-solidarity-with-french/

That the demonstrations against ISIS were added onto already organised marches or occurred inside mosques, does not mean that they did not happen!

The Paris attacks only happened on Friday; and Muslims have joined others in demonstrations of sympathy for and solidarity with the French. The TV news and other media here in the UK have shown women in Hijabs and men in Muslim dress attending such events and laying candles etc. for the dead.

People like you complain that Muslims do not demonstrate against the terrorists of ISIS, yet when shown that they do, via marches, inside mosques or other buildings, via internet campaigns, statements from Imams and other Muslim spokespeople, etc.; you are desperate to find ways to dismiss them!

[nontabury]

I would urge everyone to do the same as I did today, and watch -You Tube

Tommy Robinson at the Oxford Union 108 minutes

Yes I know he was the leader of the EDL, however I found it very interesting into how he came to hold his views.

[arjunadawn]

<snip>

Within the past few years a collective of muslim activists/scholars rebuked DAESH in a public lashing in a newspaper. It was widely touted as reflecting the silent majority in islam. However, few actually understand it said very little and the things that it did state that were true were stipulated, universally understood things. Besides, the fact that it was addressed to al Baghdadi but offered in English alone demonstrates who the real audience was. Example: All fatwas or islamic rulings must be in accordance with established islamic legal exegesis, executed only be an islamic scholar, and presented in arabic. The english speaking world would presume from this that this was a point of admonishment revealing al Baghdadi's err in his islamic command. Wrong! Baghdadi is an islamic scholar and the fatwas were in arabic. It was fodder. It was an example how the entire product was for western consumption. Why? Because DAESH was substantially correct in all its islamic exegesis, the real authorizations being decided long ago and al Baghdadi only cited them.

I do not know if the newspaper article of which you speak was about the open letter I linked to earlier.

However, I do know that open letter is written in Arabic! Click here if you do not believe me.

The website it is published on has translations into many languages; for obvious reasons I linked to the English translation.

I see that your assumptions about the motives of those behind the letter comes from Jihad Watch. I could take these assumptions more seriously if they came from an independent source, rather than from people whose aim is to demonise Islam and all Muslims!

Agree with me or not, you variously know me (TV) for some time. I do not need a source for my positions. However different than yours, I think you would agree I genuinely have my own positions. Ok. I grabbed this link because as I was typing I recalled the Baghdadi letter I went through line by line, then recalled others smarter than me had done this quicker. Instead of looking for my pdf (which I then did not complete because others had and uploaded their own) I just linked.

I do not agree or not with Jihad Watch, or even others. My opinions are formed by my own experience. What I look for are news, events that challenge what I believe, and yea, sometimes opeds. But frankly, most of the foundation for my convictions are long ago laid. I am not generally impressed by opeds- there is just little expounding necessary any longer. Whether it is the West's absurd wars in the ME or jihadis attacks on each other and the west, the script is written, I am just watching the train wreck.

I went through the Baghdadi letter immediately upon its posting. It was actually a paid full spread advert before there was a page, let alone arabic (if i recall this chronology correctly). I started line iteming the points offered and immediately realized they started off with non sequitars, what others noted as red herrings- they were points that sounded weighty and admonishing, but had no relation to the facts. The point is, al Baghdadi knows all these things the letter began with and only has the appearance of meaning to the uninformed. Also, they did not apply to him as he is singularly competent to make the decisions IAW islamic jurisprudence. I stopped after some many points because other people completed, and likely did better.

It is hard to offer a negative characterization of any who demonize an ideology that has as its core premise the demonization of every single other person on earth except muslims; indeed, equality in islam is only applicable to muslims, quite emphatically. Let me be clear- equality in islam only applies to muslims, or to dhimmis relative to other dhimmis. To stare otherwise is fraudulent. It is hardly an honest rebuke to say such people who protest that which demonizes them are demonizing the ideology. Furthermore, while there are some idiots who actually do not distinguish from muslims and the ideology that ails many within their community, most people, like me, have a disconnect that they have have to work out in their own lives. How is it that nearly every single muslim have ever met has been kinda awesome, kind, funny, and often gracious, yet it is overwhelmingly clear, even by their own admission, that the trouble is the religious text and the injunctions prohibiting any flexibility with those texts? it is the scriptures that inculcate the masses, not inherent evil in the masses.

You may not note my hand-wringing through my many posts but I have had to come to grips with this disconnect as others likely have. The fact is, both exist simultaneously- muslims as excellent people and a militant ideology weaved in their scriptures that protests modernizing, accommodation, fraternity, and glorifies killing as a beloved act of god.

[Linzz]

While Gabriel makes a good point that we all have to be aware and vigilant about radical Islam, we need to balance this with facts also.

Brigitte Gabriel has claimed that Obama supports and arms radical jihadists such as ISIS, has friends that are terrorists, was raised a Muslim and studied at Muslim ashrams. All totally unsubstantiated claims .In fact his father was an atheist.Obama attended public school and a Catholic college. When claims are made that are non factual or outright fabrications then you have to wonder about the driving agenda and credibility of the speaker,even if you agree with the sentiments. Now she is called a right wing nutjob because she has damaged her own cause.

It is necessary to look behind the face of the messenger before we take the message at face value as truth and fact and then act upon it. This is precisely how Muslim's are radicalized by their own talking heads.

Both sides have their own hate speech screaming skulls.

I know nothing about the messenger. I take what she said here at face value - her background doesn't alter what she said.

Sure, if you know anything about the messenger, then you will be biased when listening to her speak and you will probably end up with a different message.

Interesting logic. So in order to be neutral and unbiased you would not want to know if you could trust your wife with your money?

My logic was sound. I hear what someone says then make a decision if I agree with (or like) what that person said based on what they said.

Fair enough if that's all you've got to go by. However plenty of people liked what Hitler said and still do so it's subjective. Not drawing any parallels with the two though. Just thought I'd chuck in some more info about Gabriel to keep the balance.Muslims take their messages from their Imams at face value too, hence the problem we have in the world today.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed. Please read the OP and stick to the discussion.

This topic is about the situation that occurred in Paris.