Well they were mostly bored children of rich Saudis so your joke is probably much closer to the truth than you know

In Dammartin the "hostage" was not one. It's an employee that decided to remain hidden within the warehouse. He was in contact with the police and helped them in organizing the assault. He was reporting what the brothers were saying.

In the Vincennes case, the police was hearing what was going on inside the grocery thanks to a phone that the terrorist did not hang properly.

Going by that logic will you be bending backwards for say an atheist, gay or Muslim apostate who wants Quran banned or goes around shooting Muslims because Islam is a direct threat to their ideology and identity?

Nothing, as far as I can tell. Was listening to one of the channels earlier (sorry, forget which one) and they had a guest expert speaking. Said guest speculated that these men are just criminals, not "true" Islamists. I guess in addition to their existing criminal records they were behaving in a criminal manner and not a jihadist manner with these attacks. Not sure I fully understand it all but the argument (of the guest speaker) is that these are simple criminals using Islam as an excuse for their actions, nothing more.

I hope this is the end of this tragedy but alas I suspect it's going to kick off again sometime soon

I would think that the freedom of religion is rooted in the existence of religion... which itself is rooted in naivety*. Because, as I understand it, if one is truly practicing the freedom of thought, then there is no religion to choose or to follow.

Sigmund Freud's book "The Future of an Illusion" provides some great insight into the evolution of religious belief.

I would say that wisdom is rooted in the freedom of thought.

*Naivety in the sense that it evolved prior to Science and our better understanding of the nature of the Universe (which, of course, I think we've still only barely glimpsed!).

My take on it as well.

Tom

Great respect to the action of french police (RAID) and gendarmerie (GIGN).

Wrong.

Most religions have always tried to suppress other religions, i.e. NO freedom of religion.

Freedom of religion came about as a result of freedom of speech and thought.

Tom

One of the many results of this, is that it is the very enemies of Charlie Hebdo who are benefiting from this, Marine Lepen and her friends.
For the cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo who died, it would probably be the ultimate tragedy, that one of their arch-enemies, the far right- would benefit in this way.

All over Europe, the Paris events of the last 2 days are being exploited by the far right to fan hatred and attacks on Muslims and give their anti-immigration stance new credibiltiy.

You say you're a student of what, you say? And who is teaching you what exactly?

This is the principle they were carrying out, and frankly a large majority of the Muslim world agrees with - "Whoever insults a Prophet kill him.". I'm sure there was the context of history and situation where this was stated. But that sounds pretty peaceful and tolerant, doesn't it?

The satirists were using an image of the prophet to provoke thought, though whether or not it insults someone who is dead is questionable. You can choose to insult me, but I don't know you, so I don't see how that carries any weight. Furthermore, it would only really be an insult if I felt insulted. But I have a huge sense of humour. Why is the Muslim world missing one? As for cartoons, of all genres, who takes cartoons seriously anyway?

Now, Sunni Islam prohibits the visual depiction of Muhammad. The reason cited is its roots in anti-idolatry. They don't want images of Muhammad worshipped as God. And to be honest, I don't think Muhammad wanted them to worship him as God. Now with all the weight they give to a cartoon of Muhammad, aren't they getting quite close to idolizing Muhammad themselves? Is this really what Muhammad would like them to do? Kill non-believers that don't believe what they believe?

Incredible: BFMTV interviewed the brothers and the terrorist in Vincennes (9am and 3pm). They are broadcasting now the phone interview.

There was a coordinated action between Kouachi brothers and Koulibaly (Vincennes terrorist):

- the brothers said that they do not kill civilians and that the journalists at Charlie Hebdo are considered as fighters. They were financed by Al-Qaida terrorist Anwar Al-Awlaki

- Koulibaly claims himself from ISIS; he said he is coordinating with the Kouachi brothers. It's at the end of this phone interview that the police was able to listen what was going on inside (hearing him making his prayers). He killed from the beginning 3 customers inside the supermarket.

Crazy!

__________________
Resist, support, donate: ACLU
They tried to bury us, they did not know that we are seeds (Mexican proverb)

It's a pretty dumb question. I thought you you trying not to be a troll.

In the vast majority of the world, all five would be fine.

I notice you didn't bother with a church. I guess trying that in Hicksville, Alabama would be suicide. Bloody Christians - violent scum with their well recorded intolerance of other religions and their oppression of women, forced to wear denim hotpants and bear ugly bucktoothed offspring.

The well known law of unexpected consequences


Basically the Third Commandment that both Christians and Muslims "borrowed" from the Jews.
Of the three Abrahamic religions only Islam see this as a something to kill about; I believe this was a relatively recent idea in Islam - only in the last couple of hundred years? I meant defining this as a killing matter. At one time paintings of Mohammed were quite common!

I would have swapped Jain and Buddist temples for Hindu temples and Christian evangelical churches.
And then said it would depend on who was in the religious building at the time but most likely, you wouldn't have a problem in any of them.

I understand and appreciate your point, but regardless of whether or not we can de-escalate the tensions, I do think that we have the ability to escalate them.

No, because you cannot support the freedom of belief and also support enforced belief.

Well, my apologies then. The majority of this thread (earlier) had led me to believe that the terrorists had attacked the magazine in reaction to the fact that it had published satirical cartoons regarding Islam. I think that's also what the media had assumed, no?

Indeed. Fortunately, now all the terrorists are dead, there'll be no opportunity to ask any awkward questions about who else was involved.

Did anyone really believe this was ever going to end in an open trial?

Some will have more broken bones though lol

I started with 5 so ran out of spots. Maybe you can be the 6th and head out to Hicksville, Alabama? Pancake will head out to Saudi Arabia?

The female suspect is still alive but at large.

I think you've joined the wrong forum if you think all this is funny.