I'll add another extreme one. Strip any people who commit terrorist acts of their nationality and send them off to ISIS to get a real taste of what they think Islam is.

Asking Muslims to define Islam is like asking Christians to define Christianity. Everyone has their own ideas - which frankly should be fine. People don't all have to believe exactly the same thing and unless religion is involved nobody expects them to.

I think a major step would be for the ordinary Muslims in the world to come out on the streets in their thousands and protest these killings in the same way that they've protested over cartoons about Mohammed. Until they do they tacitly condon these attacks. Yes, they've all verbally condemned the attacks, but to these people that's just words, nothing more. To actually see that the Muslim majority is against everything they stand for might get it through their heads that killing someone just because you don't like what they say/do isn't the answer.

Great recipes for a total disaster....not a single feasible "solution", this goes in the direction as in Germany 80 years ago, just replace Jew with Muslim...

and how will the death penalty stop any fanatics of doing this kind of things where themselves are prepared to die for their "cause"?

Also how will this list stop christian fanatics like Breivik? (you know the guy who shot 70 children in Norway)

Isolating muslims will only make it worse, integration and mutual respect is a good start

Stop killing 1000s of innocents in Iraq and Afghanistan

Deport and remove citizenship for the whole family of these wits, they must have known that their close ones were going to Syria etc and were going radical. Why didn't they go to the police?

No other way to exterminate these brainwashed kids.

going to syria isn't a crime.

at this time of the year? Weather must be nice

Deport them to where??.. they are FRENCH

if you treat people like children, guess what, they behave like children

treat angry young men like terrorists and guess what??

In the interest of prevention, these should be heavily monitored and surveilled. I wouldn't mind closer surveillance, and loss of privacy, for the purpose of public safety. Personal privacy liberties are premised on a civilized society, and apparently, we don't really have a civilized society anymore.

Ironically, the suspects were all already previously known. They were identified in news articles dating back from 2005. Here is one NYTimes article: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/05/in...osition=&_r=1&

There was one article where these guys tried to go to Syria, got caught, and stated how pleased they were to have been prevented from going. Sounded like they were headed for reform, but apparently, terrorism is not a belief or conviction. It is simply a action and decision anyone can decide to take on, in any given day.

The only thing I could really hope for in all this is that everyone realize that naivete can have devastating effects nowadays. I think everyone should be honest about all this so we actually have a basis for real conversations, and actually have some semblance of a civil society.

it really doesn't matter what the west do, all the while we (the royal we) are bombing people in 3rd world countries day after day this kind of thing will continue.

12 innocent people dying in a drone attack in pakistan wouldn't even make the news nowadays.

see the problem?

I don't seem to remember any drone attacks or bombings before 9/11.

Well I assume there is some process that French Muslims could follow to request a law to ban such cartoons; at least that would provide a platform for debate.

There are fanatics in every religion; as mentioned there was the Scandinavian shooting of so many children also the US Ohio bombing and many other examples.
Attempting to take action against the members of a whole religion is self defeating. Either it generates more fanatics or drives the members "underground" or both.
It must be faced that it is practically impossible to identify such "lone wolves" before they act; the best that can be hoped for is to have swift and successful reaction by the police after such an event.
Better weapons control would help; how do people get their hands on such powerful weapons?

you're right, we didn't invade Iraq before 9/11, or support the Afgans against russia, or promise the kurds help if they overthrow sadam then leave them high and dry to be massacred, or support regimes the routinely persicuted there own people. No, we only did all that AFTER 9/11

I don't remember invading Iraq before 9/11 either . Are you saying the rise of extremism is the West's fault?

Mycomments in the quote, hopefully in Blue

the first iraq war?

who elses fault is it?? 'we' armed them, 'we' trained them, 'we' are quite happy to let them, nay, encourage them, to fight amongst themselves, 'we' protect the ones in favour on any given day, and 'we' screw them if they dare to say no to there western masters.

But this was a case of French fanatics attacking a French newspaper; where is the link to drones, third world, Pakistan

Yes, unfortunately, this may become a necessity - the militarization of civilian police forces. And if it shall continue on, it may require more extensive security implementations. This will raise the need for a security industry in Europe. As much as we had hope to have evolved beyond certain levels of violence, the only point these terrorists have made is to drag us backwards. Their very presence of that element here means we were all only dreaming about peace and security.

To their Islamic state of choice. If they are not happy in France, why they stay there?

its pretty easy to radicalise someone when you're killing there 'brother'

Did you miss the part where they believe that their islamic state of choice IS France.

Any more one liners you`d care to enlighten us with?