Looks like another Fundamentalist Muslim attack, this time in Paris.

[JoG2]

This obsessive and bitter goading/stalking/trolling of seafoid fairly ruins threads

funny, I had it as Sheehy (who should'nt be using the moniker of the games greats !) who was the pain in the hoop. (in fairness I dont follow some of the threads too closely)

Nor even this one
Steve was talking of the trolling of Seafoid not trolling by Seafoid.

indeed!

[gallsman]

Are you for real? Personally I had as much faith in Ahmahinejad having his finger on the button as that clown George W, who was getting advice from God of all people. And if Khomenei [sp] had had a nuclear option it would have been a toss up between him and Reagan too.

I'm deadly serious. Iran was a democracy before, there's no reason to believe it won't be again.

Iran isn't a democracy? Well now thats news to me, and to most Iranians I would imagine.

Oh they go through the motions of having elections and all, but at the end of the day nobody gets elected without the approval of the mullahs.

Oh right I didnt know that. And can't find any proof of it either, maybe you could point me in the right direction??

However it sounds like a lot of other democracies tbh e.g. its's just like the way its done in the UK then where the Head of State and Church accepts the Prime Minister's offer to form a government.

Are you really equating Khamenei with Lizzie Windsor!?

Not really but there are certainly parallels between the 2 systems in the mix of theocracy and state institutions.

Though now you mention it if you want to maybe add up which of the 2 would be responsible for invading the most foreign countries, starting the most wars and causing the most deaths over the last 30 odd years as a result of this, feel free to put the numbers up.

NB you are unlikely to be able to source this information on the BBC, which, like you appear to, tends to believe that the UK has the mother of all parliaments and is the good guy out policing the rest of the world.

Like I appear to what? I asked you one direct question and you inferred a whole load of bollocks about what I appear to believe. Unsurprisingly, you managed to get it completely wrong.

The parallels you speak of are tenuous at best. The monarchy in the UK is little more than symbolic and any suggestion otherwise is nonsense. Cameron and the government, i.e. those democratically elected, are the ones with executive power. When was the last time Liz did anything other than rubber stamp a decision?

The theocracy in Iran on the other hand is very, very real. Perhaps not as strong as previously, but still in power. If you want to get into a pathetic point scoring exercise, while I'll (bizarrely) no doubt be accused of being a turncoat, I'd happily wager that since the Iranian revolution, it has been directly responsible for many more deaths that the brits.

[Eamonnca1]

Are you for real? Personally I had as much faith in Ahmahinejad having his finger on the button as that clown George W, who was getting advice from God of all people. And if Khomenei [sp] had had a nuclear option it would have been a toss up between him and Reagan too.

I'm deadly serious. Iran was a democracy before, there's no reason to believe it won't be again.

Iran isn't a democracy? Well now thats news to me, and to most Iranians I would imagine.

Oh they go through the motions of having elections and all, but at the end of the day nobody gets elected without the approval of the mullahs.

Oh right I didnt know that. And can't find any proof of it either, maybe you could point me in the right direction??

http://www.hscentre.org/middle-east-and-north-africa/the-mullahs-selection/

However it sounds like a lot of other democracies tbh e.g. its's just like the way its done in the UK then where the Head of State and Church accepts the Prime Minister's offer to form a government.

Nope, not the same. The Queen rubber stamps the decision of parliament. If she goes against the will of parliament then the Prime Minister can demand her abdication, and she'd have to go if she wants to avoid a constitutional crisis. The English civil war sorted out who was in charge between the crown and parliament. The mullahs in Tehran are a bit more powerful than that.

[moysider]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/dieudonne-arrest-facebook-post-charlie-coulibaly-paris-gunman

France has a seriously fucked idea of what freedom of speech. The satire magazine are celebrated for repeating the action which incited 17 deaths, including the lives of those not associated to Hebdo but your man is charged with an offence for offering his opinion on FB. For the record I think both actions are f**king stupidity but how can free thinking people not see the irony of this situation.

Those cartoons could only incite murder in the mind of a brainwashed psychopath. I'd say most free thinking people can see that much. Suggesting support for those murders is incitement in my view.

They didn t behave like psychopaths imo. Undoubtedly they were brainwashed - but you could argue that about anybody that is into any  religion. They behaved a bit like The Squad that took out government agents during the war of independence.
I ve seen Dan Breen called a murdering psychopath by some; others regard him as a hero.
I am not religious but I respect religion and those that choose to practice it. I remember being very moved, on a visit to The Vatican, by the sight of an elderly Polish woman kneeling and crying at the tomb of John Paul II. Why mock others' beliefs?
I don t see why French cartoonists should be having a go at Islam.
And please don t accuse me of trying to justify what they did. I am not. I m just trying to understand why these things happen. Labelling people terrorists and psychos is just a point of view. Is it not a worry that other people see these guys as heroes; like people regard likes of Breen as a hero.

[BennyCake]

More troops, laws, intelligence, tighter controls, eradication of free speech, more checkpoints, hassling citizens across Europe etc etc.

You have to hand it to the Nazis. They know how to control the sheep.

[Eamonnca1]

They didn t behave like psychopaths imo. Undoubtedly they were brainwashed - but you could argue that about anybody that is into any  religion. They behaved a bit like The Squad that took out government agents during the war of independence.
I ve seen Dan Breen called a murdering psychopath by some; others regard him as a hero.

It's a question of motivation. The people who fought for Irish independence were fighting for justice and a better future for their country, and they generally targeted the instruments of what they regarded as a hostile foreign state that was intruding in their country. These barbarians in Paris were fighting on behalf of the invisible man in the sky, and avenging some perceived slight by targeting writers and cartoonists. Apparently mighty Allah is so sensitive that he needs people to go out and wreak death and destruction on people if they don't toe the line. Not by any stretch of the imagination can these mucksavages be regarded as heroes. They are evil, psychotic terrorists and the sooner they and their poisonous ideology is removed from the face of the earth the better.

I am not religious but I respect religion and those that choose to practice it. I remember being very moved, on a visit to The Vatican, by the sight of an elderly Polish woman kneeling and crying at the tomb of John Paul II. Why mock others' beliefs?
I don t see why French cartoonists should be having a go at Islam.

We can agree to differ on whether or not religion deserves to be mocked, although I would argue that radical Islam is such a corrosive influence that it deserves every bit of scorn that is heaped upon it.  However mocking religion is a basic right that we in the western world hold dear, and God help us if that were to be taken away by terrorist thugs who terrorize everyone into silence.

[haveaharp]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/dieudonne-arrest-facebook-post-charlie-coulibaly-paris-gunman

France has a seriously fucked idea of what freedom of speech. The satire magazine are celebrated for repeating the action which incited 17 deaths, including the lives of those not associated to Hebdo but your man is charged with an offence for offering his opinion on FB. For the record I think both actions are f**king stupidity but how can free thinking people not see the irony of this situation.

Those cartoons could only incite murder in the mind of a brainwashed psychopath. I'd say most free thinking people can see that much. Suggesting support for those murders is incitement in my view.

I am not religious but I respect religion and those that choose to practice it.  I don t see why French cartoonists should be having a go at Islam.
Is it not a worry that other people see these guys as heroes

In general i afford anothers religion the respect they show others. Islam does not respect other religions.
And yes it is a worry that others see these people as heroes. These were not the acts of desperate people fighting for their very existence with a clear politcal objective.

[seafoid]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/dieudonne-arrest-facebook-post-charlie-coulibaly-paris-gunman

France has a seriously fucked idea of what freedom of speech. The satire magazine are celebrated for repeating the action which incited 17 deaths, including the lives of those not associated to Hebdo but your man is charged with an offence for offering his opinion on FB. For the record I think both actions are f**king stupidity but how can free thinking people not see the irony of this situation.

Those cartoons could only incite murder in the mind of a brainwashed psychopath. I'd say most free thinking people can see that much. Suggesting support for those murders is incitement in my view.

I am not religious but I respect religion and those that choose to practice it.  I don t see why French cartoonists should be having a go at Islam.
Is it not a worry that other people see these guys as heroes

In general i afford anothers religion the respect they show others. Islam does not respect other religions.
And yes it is a worry that others see these people as heroes. These were not the acts of desperate people fighting for their very existence with a clear politcal objective.

On what basis can you say that? Most Muslims are ordinary people living ordinary lives. Do you know anything about Sufism, for example?
ISIS does not represent the vast majority of Muslims any more than the drug gangs in Ireland represent Irish people.

[macdanger2]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/dieudonne-arrest-facebook-post-charlie-coulibaly-paris-gunman

France has a seriously fucked idea of what freedom of speech. The satire magazine are celebrated for repeating the action which incited 17 deaths, including the lives of those not associated to Hebdo but your man is charged with an offence for offering his opinion on FB. For the record I think both actions are f**king stupidity but how can free thinking people not see the irony of this situation.

Those cartoons could only incite murder in the mind of a brainwashed psychopath. I'd say most free thinking people can see that much. Suggesting support for those murders is incitement in my view.

Incitement?? Who is being incited??

[seafoid]

Are you for real? Personally I had as much faith in Ahmahinejad having his finger on the button as that clown George W, who was getting advice from God of all people. And if Khomenei [sp] had had a nuclear option it would have been a toss up between him and Reagan too.

I'm deadly serious. Iran was a democracy before, there's no reason to believe it won't be again.

Iran isn't a democracy? Well now thats news to me, and to most Iranians I would imagine.

Oh they go through the motions of having elections and all, but at the end of the day nobody gets elected without the approval of the mullahs.

Oh right I didnt know that. And can't find any proof of it either, maybe you could point me in the right direction??

However it sounds like a lot of other democracies tbh e.g. its's just like the way its done in the UK then where the Head of State and Church accepts the Prime Minister's offer to form a government.

Are you really equating Khamenei with Lizzie Windsor!?

Not really but there are certainly parallels between the 2 systems in the mix of theocracy and state institutions.

Though now you mention it if you want to maybe add up which of the 2 would be responsible for invading the most foreign countries, starting the most wars and causing the most deaths over the last 30 odd years as a result of this, feel free to put the numbers up.

NB you are unlikely to be able to source this information on the BBC, which, like you appear to, tends to believe that the UK has the mother of all parliaments and is the good guy out policing the rest of the world.

Like I appear to what? I asked you one direct question and you inferred a whole load of bollocks about what I appear to believe. Unsurprisingly, you managed to get it completely wrong.

The parallels you speak of are tenuous at best. The monarchy in the UK is little more than symbolic and any suggestion otherwise is nonsense. Cameron and the government, i.e. those democratically elected, are the ones with executive power. When was the last time Liz did anything other than rubber stamp a decision?

The theocracy in Iran on the other hand is very, very real. Perhaps not as strong as previously, but still in power. If you want to get into a pathetic point scoring exercise, while I'll (bizarrely) no doubt be accused of being a turncoat, I'd happily wager that since the Iranian revolution, it has been directly responsible for many more deaths that the brits.

The Iran-Iraq war- who started it ? I think the West backed Saddam to counter Iranian attempts to bring the Shia of southern Iraq into the revolutionary fold (this seems to have happened post Iraq war 03 anyway ) .
The theocracy in Iran are no different to politicians anywhere. They focus on money, like leaders everywhere.
All this stuff about mad mullahs is very orientalist.   

[Keyser soze]

Are you for real? Personally I had as much faith in Ahmahinejad having his finger on the button as that clown George W, who was getting advice from God of all people. And if Khomenei [sp] had had a nuclear option it would have been a toss up between him and Reagan too.

I'm deadly serious. Iran was a democracy before, there's no reason to believe it won't be again.

Iran isn't a democracy? Well now thats news to me, and to most Iranians I would imagine.

Oh they go through the motions of having elections and all, but at the end of the day nobody gets elected without the approval of the mullahs.

Oh right I didnt know that. And can't find any proof of it either, maybe you could point me in the right direction??

http://www.hscentre.org/middle-east-and-north-africa/the-mullahs-selection/

However it sounds like a lot of other democracies tbh e.g. its's just like the way its done in the UK then where the Head of State and Church accepts the Prime Minister's offer to form a government.

Nope, not the same. The Queen rubber stamps the decision of parliament. If she goes against the will of parliament then the Prime Minister can demand her abdication, and she'd have to go if she wants to avoid a constitutional crisis. The English civil war sorted out who was in charge between the crown and parliament. The mullahs in Tehran are a bit more powerful than that.

You've referenced an article there, please please tell me that you aren't using that infantile analysis as some sort of information source about the Iranian political system.

[Keyser soze]

Are you for real? Personally I had as much faith in Ahmahinejad having his finger on the button as that clown George W, who was getting advice from God of all people. And if Khomenei [sp] had had a nuclear option it would have been a toss up between him and Reagan too.

I'm deadly serious. Iran was a democracy before, there's no reason to believe it won't be again.

Iran isn't a democracy? Well now thats news to me, and to most Iranians I would imagine.

Oh they go through the motions of having elections and all, but at the end of the day nobody gets elected without the approval of the mullahs.

Oh right I didnt know that. And can't find any proof of it either, maybe you could point me in the right direction??

However it sounds like a lot of other democracies tbh e.g. its's just like the way its done in the UK then where the Head of State and Church accepts the Prime Minister's offer to form a government.

Are you really equating Khamenei with Lizzie Windsor!?

Not really but there are certainly parallels between the 2 systems in the mix of theocracy and state institutions.

Though now you mention it if you want to maybe add up which of the 2 would be responsible for invading the most foreign countries, starting the most wars and causing the most deaths over the last 30 odd years as a result of this, feel free to put the numbers up.

NB you are unlikely to be able to source this information on the BBC, which, like you appear to, tends to believe that the UK has the mother of all parliaments and is the good guy out policing the rest of the world.

Like I appear to what? I asked you one direct question and you inferred a whole load of bollocks about what I appear to believe. Unsurprisingly, you managed to get it completely wrong.

The parallels you speak of are tenuous at best. The monarchy in the UK is little more than symbolic and any suggestion otherwise is nonsense. Cameron and the government, i.e. those democratically elected, are the ones with executive power. When was the last time Liz did anything other than rubber stamp a decision?

The theocracy in Iran on the other hand is very, very real. Perhaps not as strong as previously, but still in power. If you want to get into a pathetic point scoring exercise, while I'll (bizarrely) no doubt be accused of being a turncoat, I'd happily wager that since the Iranian revolution, it has been directly responsible for many more deaths that the brits.

Well you rowed into the middle of an argument asking a question which appeared to show shock/horror/astonishment/outrage that I had compared the Queen and the Ayatollah. Yes it did sound a bit more West Brit than West Belfrast tbh.

And I would happily take on a wee wager about that. Though how either of us could prove how many peeps either side side killed is gonna be difficult. Suffice to say that Iran hasnt been running around invading other countries on the other side of the world, or indeed anywhere, unlike our friendly neighbours.

[haveaharp]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/dieudonne-arrest-facebook-post-charlie-coulibaly-paris-gunman

France has a seriously fucked idea of what freedom of speech. The satire magazine are celebrated for repeating the action which incited 17 deaths, including the lives of those not associated to Hebdo but your man is charged with an offence for offering his opinion on FB. For the record I think both actions are f**king stupidity but how can free thinking people not see the irony of this situation.

Those cartoons could only incite murder in the mind of a brainwashed psychopath. I'd say most free thinking people can see that much. Suggesting support for those murders is incitement in my view.

I am not religious but I respect religion and those that choose to practice it.  I don t see why French cartoonists should be having a go at Islam.
Is it not a worry that other people see these guys as heroes

In general i afford anothers religion the respect they show others. Islam does not respect other religions.
And yes it is a worry that others see these people as heroes. These were not the acts of desperate people fighting for their very existence with a clear politcal objective.

On what basis can you say that? Most Muslims are ordinary people living ordinary lives. Do you know anything about Sufism, for example?
ISIS does not represent the vast majority of Muslims any more than the drug gangs in Ireland represent Irish people.

Can you say that Christians in predominately Muslim countries are treated with the same tolerance as Muslims are in the West ? Can they build churches in Egypt for example with the same ease as Mosques can be built in the West ? I doubt it.
I am fully aware that ISIS do not represent the majority of Muslims. FFS they are killing each other mainly with those poor Yazidi people stuck in the middle of them. Sufism - only thing i know about it is that its some form of mystical aspect to islam. What can you tell me about it ?

[haveaharp]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/dieudonne-arrest-facebook-post-charlie-coulibaly-paris-gunman

France has a seriously fucked idea of what freedom of speech. The satire magazine are celebrated for repeating the action which incited 17 deaths, including the lives of those not associated to Hebdo but your man is charged with an offence for offering his opinion on FB. For the record I think both actions are f**king stupidity but how can free thinking people not see the irony of this situation.

Those cartoons could only incite murder in the mind of a brainwashed psychopath. I'd say most free thinking people can see that much. Suggesting support for those murders is incitement in my view.

Incitement?? Who is being incited??

Far right groups could be incited to terrorise ordinary people in retaliation for example

[seafoid]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/dieudonne-arrest-facebook-post-charlie-coulibaly-paris-gunman

France has a seriously fucked idea of what freedom of speech. The satire magazine are celebrated for repeating the action which incited 17 deaths, including the lives of those not associated to Hebdo but your man is charged with an offence for offering his opinion on FB. For the record I think both actions are f**king stupidity but how can free thinking people not see the irony of this situation.

Those cartoons could only incite murder in the mind of a brainwashed psychopath. I'd say most free thinking people can see that much. Suggesting support for those murders is incitement in my view.

I am not religious but I respect religion and those that choose to practice it.  I don t see why French cartoonists should be having a go at Islam.
Is it not a worry that other people see these guys as heroes

In general i afford anothers religion the respect they show others. Islam does not respect other religions.
And yes it is a worry that others see these people as heroes. These were not the acts of desperate people fighting for their very existence with a clear politcal objective.

On what basis can you say that? Most Muslims are ordinary people living ordinary lives. Do you know anything about Sufism, for example?
ISIS does not represent the vast majority of Muslims any more than the drug gangs in Ireland represent Irish people.

Can you say that Christians in predominately Muslim countries are treated with the same tolerance as Muslims are in the West ? Can they build churches in Egypt for example with the same ease as Mosques can be built in the West ? I doubt it.
I am fully aware that ISIS do not represent the majority of Muslims. FFS they are killing each other mainly with those poor Yazidi people stuck in the middle of them. Sufism - only thing i know about it is that its some form of mystical aspect to islam. What can you tell me about it ?

Switzerland voted in 2005 to ban minarets.

Egypt is going through a political crisis- normally relations between Copts and Muslims are good.
I wouldn't hold up the wee 6 as a barometer of the state of play between catholics and protestants globally either.
Muslims are as human as Christians- singling them out for intolerance regardless of political economy considerations is not really on.
Sufism is much more tolerant tradition that Saudi doesn't like and is trying to undermine.