I think they deliberately delayed announcing it a bit. The Washington Post reported his death yesterday. I saw amatuer video (I don't have link) apparently with audio of a brief shouted exchange between the woman in the apartment and police before she detonated the vest. They yell 'Where is your boyfriend?' And she screams back 'He is not my boyfriend'. I wonder if his cousin was a kind of bodyguard, and maybe even a walking suicide pill
Paris terror attacks on Friday 13th
- Thread starter Neutral
- Start date
He has been shot by a sniper and then riddled with bullets according to the police, they could not recognize him. The journalists were just blabbing their mouths.
The information came from intelligence officials, not just journalists making things up.
By all accounts, most moderate Muslims in the region didn't have much of a problem with Western governments forcing regime change. The majority of Iraqis wanted Saddam gone, that's for sure. Obviously, the instability that resulted from the power vacuum when he went was predictable and regrettable but you're wrong to imply that every Muslim affected should put this all down to "Western terrorism" as they're probably able to have a much more nuanced opinion on what went on than you give them credit for. The historical "border drawing" is one of those things that countries have to live with when they go to war and lose. Germany pulled through ok despite far more punitive post-war meddling in their borders. It's a pity that more thought didn't go into this particular carve-up but again, I'm sure most moderate Muslims have a mature enough outlook on life to accept that a violent response is not the only way to address historical injustice.
So in answer to your final question, I'm sure @Sultan would say to them that suicide bombs and indiscriminate slaughter of civilians is a terrible course of action, no matter how aggrieved they may feel by the status quo.
That would make sense.
Really? I heard them say that one of the two bodies was probably Abaaoud but they have been clear that they weren't sure.
I'm obviously not @Sultan but had to jump in despite an earlier request to keep the religion talk out of this thread.
The tax/Jizya was levied on non-muslims living in Muslim countries. Islam has a universal tax (zakat) - Jizya was the tax collected from non-muslims (they were required to pay it in order to retain the right to live and continue to practice their faith under muslim rule - mainly Jews and Christians at the time of implementation). The justifications/righteousness or lack thereof is a debate that can be had in the religion thread I suppose.
But, it has zero relevance when it concerns Muslims in the west - which was the issue Sultan was addressing.
I'm going to ignore the 1st question. the definition of Jihad - what it means, who is to wage it, how it is waged, against whom and why...have been discussed a million times.
I'm almost tempted to watch David Lynch's "The Elephant Man".
There's been far too much mention of elephants around here lately. It's got to you.
Do you have any links to that first sentence?
The majority of Iraqis wanted Saddam gone? They certainly didn´t welcome the invading "terrorists" with open arms and put up one hell of a fight.
Never implied every Muslim affected should put this down to "Western Terrorism." But it certainly objectively smells like, walks like, bombs like, invades like western terrorism to loads of people.
To compare Germany post war border meddling to how the Middle East was carved up by European powers for their own economic exploitation is so laughable I won´t even address it. God that´s a poor analogy. Amateur.
So what is mature moderate Muslims outlook on the outrageous historical injustice and continuing violent Western intervention in their homelands and the displacement, radicalism and violence that has ensued? Shrug their shoulders? Take it on the chin? I´ve always thought their relative silence on radical Islam spoke volumes. I´m sure you´d be quite passive and moderate if England or the US and Dick Cheney decided to pursue violent "regime change" in Ireland. What is a proper "moderate response?"
Sultans response actually was: most muslims in the UK are from the Indian subcontinent, want peace, and can´t be bothered with fighting back.
Please avoid the typical "whitexplanation."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...b6d52e-8d6a-11e5-934c-a369c80822c2_story.html
I think I remember US intel sources earlier in the day had said the same as well.
I watched it very late at night years ago without really knowing what it was. Desperately sad stuff, if I remember right.
you're such a dick.Ironic you can accuse me of bad analogies, while implying that the violent "regime change" of a moderate and democratically elected government in Ireland would be in any way comparable to ousting a monster like Sadam Hussein.
Anyhoo, I'm gonna put you on ignore. Congrats, one of only three people on here so incapable of rational discussion that even an argumentative turd like me can't be bothered un-picking your nonsense. Quite an achievement. Cheerio.
"Whitexplanation", ffs...
So many Muslims believe, with some justice as you see it, that something called 'The West' is at war with something called 'Islam'.
What would your advice have been to European Christians circa 1098 AD who believed 'Islam' was at war with 'Christendom'?
Ironic you can accuse me of bad analogies, while implying that the violent "regime change" of a moderate and democratically elected government in Ireland would be in any way comparable to ousting a monster like Sadam Hussein.
Anyhoo, I'm gonna put you on ignore. Congrats, one of only three people on here so incapable of rational discussion that even an argumentative turd like me can't be bothered un-picking your nonsense. Quite an achievement. Cheerio.
"Whitexplanation", ffs...
Good bye dahling.
Last edited:
The problem is that the body they are talking about has no head, at least that's what they said yesterday. That's why they needed his fingerprints to confirm it. They were convinced that it was him though.
That´s what I imagine many Muslims believe. That can´t be good. Not sure I´d be able to give advice to European Christians circa 1098 AD. With or without my advice, they would soon be off to plunder and invade the middle east on their own. Sounds familiar!
Well let's say you're talking to a Muslim in Syria in 1100 AD who asks you why the Crusaders are invading. Would you offer a long list of anti-Islam grievances which Christians hold which might legitimately explain their actions?
That´s a tough one. I´m so incapable of religious belief, I´d be wasting my time in that sphere. I´d probably say, "follow the money."
It is important to note that most of the terrorists were born in the West. They feel isolated and rejected. So they go back to their 'roots'.Groups like ISIS give them a sense of belonging and power.
Other minority groups deal with their issues in different ways. It is very important for teh Western governments to be as inclusive and reach to these communities. This not only helps them but helps the majority. Give them reason to reject these calls to war against the peoiple they live with.
Other minority groups deal with their issues in different ways. It is very important for teh Western governments to be as inclusive and reach to these communities. This not only helps them but helps the majority. Give them reason to reject these calls to war against the peoiple they live with.
Or you could say that the crusades were a response to a centuries long terror on the Christian population by the Muslim forces which saw Christians either murdered or subjugated, land confiscated, Jerusalem invaded and hundreds of Christian churches and monasteries destroyed etc. That's a pretty fine rationale for the Crusades if you ask me. 'Follow the money' would probably feature last on my checklist.
Well if you asked the Crusaders why they were invading, their first response would probably be to say that 'Islam' was at war with Christianity, that Muslim armies had spent the previous four centuries conquering former Christian lands, including the holiest site in Christianity, had laid siege to the great imperial capital of Christendom (Constantinople which the Ottomans would conquer a few centuries later), had sacked the other one (Rome) and had, over the course of the previous century, conquered Christian Anatolia and destroyed the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
Does any of this offer a legitimate explanation for how the Crusaders behaved?
My experience with minorities (and I was one in Germany for nearly two decades) is that they couldn't care less about inclusiveness and integration. They stick to their own communities, speak their own language and mind their own business. There's a gazillion of integration-related courses and workshops and all sorts of offers available to everyone, it's up to the people to use it.
Maybe, but it's more likely that he didn't want to risk trying to leave France given the security. They would obviously have been looking for that.
If governments do not reach out, in spite of all these facilities, this will continue to happen. You say you are a minority. I assume you are white. I was speaking about people of colour and of Islamic faith.
You mean asians then? (Sorry, just pointing out the hole...)
Grow a beard and I look like an Arab. And I have experienced a fair share of injustices by the police and racist Germans. But I wouldn't dream of placing the blame for my own failures on the government authorities. There are plenty of stories of success from people who grew up in the gutter of cultural isolation and tbf the majority of foreigners get along quite well. I just think it's a huge stretch to somehow link acts of terror to some sort of perceived injustice, desperation and lack of opportunities.
Naturally, this has to be taken with a grain of salt but Cazeneuve stated this afternoon that French agencies believed Abaaoud not to be on EU soil.
He claimed they haven't received information from EU countries that he actually was*, and received information that he was in October in Greece by a foreign intelligence service after the attacks.
Cazeneuve also stated that Abaaoud was involved in 4 out of 6 foiled attacks on French soil.
* e.g. he was in Germany in the area of Cologne and elsewhere according to German intelligence services and polics (2007; January 2014 at the airport; at a not specified time he crossed the border from Germany into Austria)
He claimed they haven't received information from EU countries that he actually was*, and received information that he was in October in Greece by a foreign intelligence service after the attacks.
Cazeneuve also stated that Abaaoud was involved in 4 out of 6 foiled attacks on French soil.
* e.g. he was in Germany in the area of Cologne and elsewhere according to German intelligence services and polics (2007; January 2014 at the airport; at a not specified time he crossed the border from Germany into Austria)
So in this analogy, as Islamic nations today would feel rightfully aggrieved by the Christian West´s invasions, political meddling, economic subjugation, droning etc etc, are you giving a "fine rationale" to Islamic terrorism (crusade) against the West?
You are wrong. Racism is primarily aimed at non-white peoples. Though prejudices exist against other races. To solely blame this on those communities does not begin to address the issue. It is simply common sense for our own self preservation to have them with us..not against us.
Primarily people of colour.
No, not really, at least in Germany it is aimed not only at black people but also at Turks, Yugoslavs, Arabs, Greeks- any males with darker skin features. I don't even recall the number of times I was called Scheiss-Ausländer or Scheiss-Türke. The last one is a classic. And I'm not even Turkish, obviously.
Skin colour doesn't matter all that much when it comes to racism. Travellers are widely despised in Ireland and England by people with the exact same skin tone.
I'm a little confused by where this tangent is going though?
I'm a little confused by where this tangent is going though?
I completely disagree with mihajlovic.
I'll leave out commenting on other groups. But, my parents came to the US in the early 70s.
They were muslims from Bangladesh.
People from NY or the East coast will know Jackson Heights - is full of bengalis.
It is the place many new immigrants have congregated to...but with time and upward social mobility have then moved on.
My parents decided to make Virginia home. There are of course pockets - Detroit with a large muslim population...but it is far too simplistic to say, minorities simply stick to their own.
I think for those in Europe - the east end in London is a good example.
Africans, Chinese, eastern european Jews, then Asians - special mention to Sylheti Bengalis.
But with time each group moves on...why? Because they continue to integrate into the host nation.
I have cousins who live in more affluent areas of London who actually look down on those in the East End...'fobs' :uhoh:
I'll leave out commenting on other groups. But, my parents came to the US in the early 70s.
They were muslims from Bangladesh.
People from NY or the East coast will know Jackson Heights - is full of bengalis.
It is the place many new immigrants have congregated to...but with time and upward social mobility have then moved on.
My parents decided to make Virginia home. There are of course pockets - Detroit with a large muslim population...but it is far too simplistic to say, minorities simply stick to their own.
I think for those in Europe - the east end in London is a good example.
Africans, Chinese, eastern european Jews, then Asians - special mention to Sylheti Bengalis.
But with time each group moves on...why? Because they continue to integrate into the host nation.
I have cousins who live in more affluent areas of London who actually look down on those in the East End...'fobs' :uhoh:
fair enough. As I said if we do not have them with us, we will need to watch them very closely...because they can easily be against us. Do we want to live in such a society? Assimilation is the key.
Unfortunately, I can testify that verbal abuse against foreigners, including people from Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Poland, etc. Obviously that's not applicable to all cities and neighbourhoods, I'd say it's a minority who acts that way but it occurs also these days much more often than people out of Germany may think.
You are referring to prejudices. Racism can only be practiced by those who have power over minority races.
Have you been reading Harry Potter recently, by any chance?
Not for about 10 or 15 years but now you mention it, the storyline does sound familiar!
Oh god, not that argument. Make up a new word, racism already has this definition:
Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.