Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Our Indian friends can't see that Muslims are being portrayed as monsters under the cover of such news...only people you guys need to be scared of are white people with guns and mental illnesses.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Peace Southie
You have a too good opinion of me to say that I missed the point. I agree in principle that violence should be no more ... Then please criticise the instigators of violence not the reactionaries ... The Charlie Hebdos of this world are being violent ... Violence should be halted by the strong nations first see if you can convince them then the rest will follow.
I have already stated unnecessary wars should not be fought.
Now back to violence that is "blessed by religion". By labeling folks who criticize (and mock) religion as "instigators" of violence, you have once again committed the same mistake - justifying the violent reaction to mocking of religion.
Islam may very well be the religion of peace. But folks (and I have to include you based on your posts) who justify violence as a response to insults to religion, are not true followers and practioners of Islam.
You simply cannot have it both ways. Lay claim to peace. And advocate violence.
Violence should be the LAST resort. And that is the final word.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
I have already stated unnecessary wars should not be fought.
Now back to violence that is "blessed by religion". By labeling folks who criticize (and mock) religion as "instigators" of violence, you have once again committed the same mistake - justifying the violent reaction to mocking of religion.
Islam may very well be the religion of peace. But folks (and I have to include you based on your posts) who justify violence as a response to insults to religion, are not true followers and practioners of Islam.
You simply cannot have it both ways. Lay claim to peace. And advocate violence.
Violence should be the LAST resort. And that is the final word.
Please show us where he did that?
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Post 38 from psyay
"You see that question is a meaningless one it does not get to the root of terroristic tendencies. The reason being that if I were to have to answer it, I too would end up in the "violent" side, but I feel I am the least violent of them all.
1) Where a strict law is in place prohibiting defamation of religious figures.
2) Where evidence is obtained that ridicule is intended
3) Where a clear penalty is in place associated with number 1) that deems such punishment should be in place.
4) If convicted and no apology or removal of said material is done then ...
If such people are sentenced with a violent sentence then that in my view is "justified" ...
a) It does not mean I would be the violent one
b) Rather I would seek to protect even the biggest mischief maker until he is properly trialled and convicted."
Post 39 from me refuted this stating laws based on religion and trials from kangaroo courts of regimes shoukd bot be used as a valid reason to use violence against those who mock religion.
post 40 from Psyah for the 2nd time justified violence by calling those who mock religion as INSTIGATORS of violence.
so stop throwing words such as liar or lying.
read and understand what is being said.
And if after reading and understanding, you still claim I am lying, I would have to conclude there indeed is one person doing the lying in the discussion you and I are having.
I will stop this discussion with you right here. Before you open another blog accusing "the Indian" of hating you.
cheers
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Just to summarize
1).If someone mocks a religion, a violent response is NOT UNDESTANDABLE. The mockers shoukd NOT be labeled INSTIGATORS of violence. By doing so, one is JUSTIFYING a violent response.
2) There should be on punishment for mocking religions. Especially not DEATH. Regimes that use religious based laws to put offenders to death should be condemned
3) A person has to walk the walk. Not just talk the talk. If a religion is a religion of peace - and I am not contesting that - then don't just talk the talk. Show through your positions on above issues that you are following the religion of peace. And don't justify violence stating 1) mocker instigated it. 2) The religious courts have convicted him. So you stand behind the punishment.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
^DO you mean there is no thing like instigation?
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
^DO you mean there is no thing like instigation?
No. I dont. Those who go out of their way to mock religion are trying to instigate some sort of a reaction. They are instigators for a reaction. But if that reaction is VIOLENCE, it is the ones carrying out violence and the 24 to 34 pct justifying this violence that bear the responsibility for VIOLENCE.
I am simply stating the instigation shoukd give rise to protests and other organized ways to combat such attempts.
A VIOLENT response is not an option. Under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. This sentence is key. That 24 to 32 pct believe a VIOLENT response is justified upon such INSTIGATION is and should be cause for concern.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Again, its 24 percent not 32 percent. Your not doing a very good job of hiding your bias here.
Alarming ! Oh no, 24 percent of British muslims think violence is sometimes justified in cases of Blasphemy. lets all hide under our beds. God knows, you as a HIndu would know nothing off violence for the sake of religion.
.
Accusing someone of bias is the last resort when one runs out of intelligent arguments, not something expected from you who has always used logic to respond.
68% said they don't support violence while the rest either supported violence or indicated support by their silence. Pray tell me how you would interpret the response of the 8% to such a direct question ?
And religious violence is wrong - Hindu or Muslim does not matter. God does not need you, me or someone else to defend him by killing others. And if he does, then I have serious doubts about that religion.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
I agree that among the 24 to 32 pct who believe violence is Justified Most wont Actually Engage In Violence. But the fact that they are supportive of it is alarming. Because they do provide moral support to those who engage in violence.
Support for violence should always be a no no. Whether it is for unjustified wars or in the name of religion.
Like I said, there are always those who hold unconventional views... Perhaps views which we find disturbing. You simply have to ask the right question, press the right buttons to get people to admit less then palatable opinions.
bottom line, lets not over react.
Support for violence should be a no no. But unfortunately, not all people are that enlightened.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Accusing someone of bias is the last resort when one runs out of intelligent arguments, not something expected from you who has always used logic to respond.
68% said they don't support violence while the rest either supported violence or indicated support by their silence. Pray tell me how you would interpret the response of the 8% to such a direct question ?
And religious violence is wrong - Hindu or Muslim does not matter. God does not need you, me or someone else to defend him by killing others. And if he does, then I have serious doubts about that religion.
When someone assumes that people who dont respond or say they dont know are definently in support of violence, that betrays a certain bias.
Yes violence is bad always. But these days its Muslims who are being demonized. Articles like this dont help.
Doubt is a good thing. allows you to think straight,
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Like I said, there are always those who hold unconventional views... Perhaps views which we find disturbing. You simply have to ask the right question, press the right buttons to get people to admit less then palatable opinions.
bottom line, lets not over react.
Support for violence should be a no no. But unfortunately, not all people are that enlightened.
Med I agree with everything you said. Except the overreacting part.
24 to 32 pct is a sizable number. Caught me by surprise actually.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Med I agree with everything you said. Except the overreacting part. 24 to 32 pct is a sizable number. Caught me by surprise actually.
Southie, if these people are not violent, then let them believe what they like. If you over react you risk demonizing people, it causes people to become paranoid. This increases the problem not decrease it. Articles like this cause more tensions then they resolve. What do you intend to do?
And like I said, you ask the right questions, you can make people say anything. Specially where religion is involved... Perhaps it is disturbing, but then again, how would people of other faiths respond to something similar ? If we posed a similarly sensitive question pertaining to another hot-button topic, for example, if we exploit the nationalistic feelings of Indians, how many would support killing unarmed protestors if it meant not doing so would mean Kashmir joins Pakistan. So what im saying is, when you ask people sensitive questions, that are emotionally charged, you get disturbing responses.
It just seems like they are targeting Muslims specifically. Putting people on the spot, challenging them, exploiting their religiosity in order to tar an entire population.
Beyond that, there isnt much to discuss. We know there are Muslim extremists in the world and Muslims have a lot of issues to contend with. So this article shouldnt really shock anyone. But constantly highlighting this issue is only going to alienate people further and do more harm then good. The solution isnt to scare people.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Post 38 from psyay "You see that question is a meaningless one it does not get to the root of terroristic tendencies. The reason being that if I were to have to answer it, I too would end up in the "violent" side, but I feel I am the least violent of them all.
1) Where a strict law is in place prohibiting defamation of religious figures. 2) Where evidence is obtained that ridicule is intended 3) Where a clear penalty is in place associated with number 1) that deems such punishment should be in place. 4) If convicted and no apology or removal of said material is done then ...
If such people are sentenced with a violent sentence then that in my view is "justified" ...
a) It does not mean I would be the violent one b) Rather I would seek to protect even the biggest mischief maker until he is properly trialled and convicted."
Post 39 from me refuted this stating laws based on religion and trials from kangaroo courts of regimes shoukd bot be used as a valid reason to use violence against those who mock religion.
post 40 from Psyah for the 2nd time justified violence by calling those who mock religion as INSTIGATORS of violence.
so stop throwing words such as liar or lying. read and understand what is being said.
And if after reading and understanding, you still claim I am lying, I would have to conclude there indeed is one person doing the lying in the discussion you and I are having.
I will stop this discussion with you right here. Before you open another blog accusing "the Indian" of hating you.
cheers
Peace Southie
I am not justifying violence of that type that concerns the media - which is the vigilante type - however I can't control people and if they feel affected so much by it then people should know better ... I am saying where a specific law is in place then the sentence which may be violent is "justified" - I still don't like it - and neither do you - but it is justified in that respect and now it comes back to the original questionnaire ... because a person holds it justified in certain contexts does not make a person a terrorist sympathiser ...
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Southie, if these people are not violent, then let them believe what they like. If you over react you risk demonizing people, it causes people to become paranoid. This increases the problem not decrease it. Articles like this cause more tensions then they resolve. What do you intend to do?
And like I said, you ask the right questions, you can make people say anything. Specially where religion is involved... Perhaps it is disturbing, but then again, how would people of other faiths respond to something similar ? If we posed a similarly sensitive question pertaining to another hot-button topic, for example, if we exploit the nationalistic feelings of Indians, how many would support killing unarmed protestors if it meant not doing so would mean Kashmir joins Pakistan. So what im saying is, when you ask people sensitive questions, that are emotionally charged, you get disturbing responses.
It just seems like they are targeting Muslims specifically. Putting people on the spot, challenging them, exploiting their religiosity in order to tar an entire population.
Beyond that, there isnt much to discuss. We know there are Muslim extremists in the world and Muslims have a lot of issues to contend with. So this article shouldnt really shock anyone. But constantly highlighting this issue is only going to alienate people further and do more harm then good. The solution isnt to scare people.
Med, i vaguely recall reading the article. It looked like a hit job with a agenda. So it didn't interest me.
With respect to religion, to be honest, it is only among those who follows modern version of Islam that violence is an option for religion based mocking. Bill Maher mocks Christ, Christians. But violence has never been an option.
You brought up Kashmir. You will be the first to agree it has nothing to with religion mocking. Are there unreasonable Hindus who are violent and hateful. Yes. Did they vote Modi into power? Yes. Do they deny Modi had a hand in the Gujarat massacre? And then do they open up threads with an agenda such as this? Yes.
But to the best of my knowledge if someone insults Ganesha they won't be put to death. If a Hindu supports such a punishment, I will be the first to denounce it.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Peace Southie
I am not justifying violence of that type that concerns the media - which is the vigilante type - however I can't control people and if they feel affected so much by it then people should know better ... I am saying where a specific law is in place then the sentence which may be violent is "justified" - I still don't like it - and neither do you - but it is justified in that respect and now it comes back to the original questionnaire ... because a person holds it justified in certain contexts does not make a person a terrorist sympathiser ...
Peace Psyah. Thank you for being polite. I think enough has been said about this topic. As Med suggested I don't want this to go out if hand. Maybe another time we carry on with this discussion. I just want to take time out.
Thanks again.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Med, i vaguely recall reading the article. It looked like a hit job with a agenda. So it didn't interest me.
With respect to religion, to be honest, it is only among those who follows modern version of Islam that violence is an option for religion based mocking. Bill Maher mocks Christ, Christians. But violence has never been an option.
You brought up Kashmir. You will be the first to agree it has nothing to with religion mocking. Are there unreasonable Hindus who are violent and hateful. Yes. Did they vote Modi into power? Yes. Do they deny Modi had a hand in the Gujarat massacre? And then do they open up threads with an agenda such as this? Yes.
But to the best of my knowledge if someone insults Ganesha they won't be put to death. If a Hindu supports such a punishment, I will be the first to denounce it.
Some people are passionate about Religion, others are passionately nationalistic, passionate about certain political ideology. My point wasnt about religion. Its about anything thats considered sensitive. That can evoke passions in people. I cite Indians because I know that many are deeply nationalistic. And so if put in a situation where that passion is evoked, as when Kashmir is brought up, then im sure many would express very controversial opinions. For many muslims its this idea of blasphemy. And in the current environment, where this is such a dangerous topic, you are very likely to find people who express such opinions. Many Muslims you must understand are angry and defensive. Religion in such an atmosphere of anti muslim paranoia takes on a certain gravitas that it might not otherwise. So really, like I said, dont read to much into it. People are emotional these days. Lets not make it worse by blowing things out of proportion. If they arent violent, then leave them to their opinion. your not going to change them by demonizing them or continuing to antagonize them.
Its possible that given a more harmonious atmosphere, many of these people may not ecpres this opinion at all. Of course I denounce the opinion, but you have to understand, a lot goes into formulating a certain opinion. We dont know what motivates these people to say that. So we shouldnt read to much into it. Its cause for caution, but not panic.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
I get what you are saying Med. I think you are correct. Better not stir up passions now. As you point out, there is nothing positive that can be achieved.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
I get what you are saying Med. I think you are correct. Better not stir up passions now. As you point out, there is nothing positive that can be achieved.
As I mentioned before, this cartoon issue only became an issue when it was made into one. South Park did a cartoon of the Prophet a decade back with little or no repercussion. The reason is, I think, because the environment then wasn't as poisonous.
Today however, after a decade of jingoism and rhetoric, the atmosphere is so full of mutual distrust and paranoia that every thing gets blown out of proportion. Its almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy. They (the media) expect a reaction, they highlight this issue, it gets picked up in the press, Muslims who themselves are extremely paranoid and tense then disseminate it further, people get angry, violence ensues, then the media says look at those violent Muslims and then the cycle repeats.
A lot of the mess the world is in could have been prevented had cooler heads stepped back, took a deep breath and just left it all alone. Instead we got the Iraq war and and the stupid war on terrorism and Guantanamo. And it all just feeds of itself.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Doubt is a good thing. allows you to think straight,
Exactly ! Wish more people would actually step back and question their beliefs instead of mindlessly reacting in a violent fashion, or supporting violence.
Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Exactly ! Wish more people would actually step back and question their beliefs instead of mindlessly reacting in a violent fashion, or supporting violence.
or intentionally acting in ways which they know will provoke and cause hurt to others' deep-rooted religious sentiments.
The fact of the matter from observation is this, if the provocations continue the blowbacks will continue. Respect begets respects, and insulting religious figures can sometimes beget violent reaction which though may not be justified but that's just the reality of it. Want to garner peace without hypocrisy? Stop provoking others. Isn't that the same tune a vast majority of western governments preach to Iraq and Afghanistan when they're questioned about unjust invasion.