Regarding the Attacks in Paris:

BBC ? Is n't that the Broadcasting Britisch Conspiracy company that works for the government?

Apply that logic to the Bush doctrine.

Well if they are dead then their will does not matter any longer one way or another anymore then Carthage will matter.

Once all of IS are dead Carthage will suddenly become relevant? You don't half come up with weird ****.

I think Tunis will remain the capital of Tunisia irrespective of what happens to IS.

ALL Muslims.

i don't think muslin would be strong enough for making a strawman, i think that's why they use sacking (burlap) or jute as it's sometimes called

Paris terror: Muslim leaders around the world condemn 'heinous' attacks
Source: The Independent

Muslim leaders around the world have condemned the Paris attacks that left 127 people dead and as many as 80 people fighting for their lives in critical conditions.

Many of the denunciations came before Isis released a statement claiming responsibility for the attacks that have devastated the French capital and left many reeling.

Iran’s president Hassan Rouhani condemned the attacks, calling them a “crime against humanity” and said he would postpone his plan to visit France as part of a wider European trip this weekend.

The foreign minister for Qatar, Khaled al-Attiyah, labelled the atrocities “heinous”.

Joko Widodo, the leader of Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, said his nation “condemns the violence that took place in Paris.”

Kuwaiti Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Sabah said the “criminal acts of terrorism” run “counter to all teachings of holy faith and humanitarian values.”

Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/paris-terror-muslim-leaders-around-the-world-condemn-heinous-attacks-a6734711.html

How Muslims around the world condemned the Paris attacks: ‘Terrorism has NO religion’
Source: Washington Post

Muslims and their supporters took to social media last night and this morning to condemn the deadly terror attacks in Paris and reiterate the difference between Islam and extremist dogma.

As news about the shootings trickled out, an eyewitness said that one of the perpetrators had yelled “Allahu Akbar,” (“God is great” in Arabic), before firing into a crowd at the Bataclan concert hall in Paris. Just before noon local time, French President François Hollande said the Islamic State was responsible for the deaths and called the attack an “act of war.”

Muslim groups and countries widely condemned the terror attacks in Paris, and Muslims and supporters around the world took to social media to defend Islam as a nonviolent faith.



Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/14/how-muslims-around-the-world-condemned-the-paris-attacks/

Two articles that stated the same thing one right after the other Bob?

In any case, as I written on here many times before the vast percents of all Muslims just wish to live in peace and the bulk of the religion is no worst and perhaps slightly better then the two others major religions.

Be that as it many, those terrorists who was more then willing to give their lives in the name of their faith do indeed have a version of Islam as their religion.

Now, who would have guessed that Q is the first in line to adopt every wack-ass conspiracy theory that comes down the pike, eh?

Were the Paris Attacks Predicted on the January Cover of The Economist?


http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/were-the-paris-attacks-predicted-on-the-january-cover-of-the-economist/#prettyPhoto

every wack-ass conspiracy?

Do you realy think I automatically embrace every conspiracy theory?

Now, can you also explain your reaction towards me?

You think I'm some kind of fool? If I did that, it would reveal the whole plot.

Ok, well, so you can't!

See ya!

Well the question was posed to FBM and he responded and, surprise surprise, it didn't match yours. Besides, I don't think "strawman" means what you think it means

I understand that there are some people who believe virtually all Muslims are terrible people, but they are idiots.

I also understand that there are some people who believe the fact that the perpetrators of the attack were Muslims who carried out their heinous crimes while invoking the name of their god doesn't matter one whit, but they are idiots too.

You can flood this thread with the text of articles that report that Muslim leaders have spoken out against the attack but it is of little relevance. As has been noted previously (perhaps on another thread) the leaders of Saudi Arabia and Qatar have expressed condemnation of the terrorist who carried out the attack, and yet they are both known to financially fund terrorist groups. I don't know if the Supreme Leader of Iran has added his voice to the condemnations, but if he has, his words would also be completely hollow since his country is the foremost national supporter of terrorist organizations. I'm sure that some of the "leaders" who have spoken out are sincere, but the obvious question is "Do they speak for their followers?" Here again, I believe many of them do, because I believe the majority of Muslims are appalled by the actions of the extremists in their midst, but this doesn't mean there isn't a very large "minority" who support the terrorists. It also doesn't mean that the ones who oppose them are doing all they can to clean their religion of the stain they represent.

To repeat: Previously cited polls indicate 80% of Arabs support ISIS, 80% of London Muslims support ISIS and at least 42 million Muslims to one extent or the other support ISIS. By any civilized measure, ISIS is an army of psychotics who revel in rape, torture and murder. It takes an incredible degree of rationalization to regard them with anything but horror and repugnance. To support them?

42 million is a fraction of the more than 1 billion Muslims on earth, but it is not an insignificant number, and if the number of Islamist sympathizers was so small as to be meaningless why are people always worried about the reaction of the Arab Street? Why is there never a shortage of Muslims rioting over silly affronts like a kooky American pastor threatening to burn Korans, an independent film maker's video relating to the life of Mohammed, political cartoons depicting Mohammed etc?

These are the images of Muslims the world sees. It may be unfair and it maybe the fault of the media, but the media doesn't have to work very hard to find Muslims celebrating the deaths of Westerners at the hands of terrorists or burning the flags of Western nations and calling for their extermination.

No one can compel moderate Muslims to take whatever action is necessary to replace these images with what they believe to be a more accurate view of their religion and its followers. I wouldn't necessarily blame any of them if they resented a suggestion that they should, but if they care what the West thinks about Islam and them, they will be more vocal, more visible in their condemnation of Islamism.

These groups depend on the support of ordinary and extra-ordinary Muslims, and they would find it difficult to operate without it . It stretches credulity to believe that six men could carry out a well planned, well coordinated attack on multiple locations in Paris without some local assistance. As well, there are numerous reports from Muslims that mosques operating within Western cities are recruitment centers for jihadis. Every Muslim attending these mosques is not a terrorist but everyone of them have listened to extremist rhetoric from their clerics. If they continue to attend these mosques it is only logical to assume that they are not offended by such rhetoric.

You want to frame this issue in black and white terms: If someone is concerned by the degree to which sympathy for terrorism exists with Muslim communities, one must believe all Muslims are terrorists or guilty of their crimes. If all Muslims are not terrorists then it doesn't matter that any of them are.

It's a lot more complex that you want it to be.

Ya tryin to say that the peaceful majority is irrelevant?

I think it's fairly simple, you want to condemn Islam, but at the same time you don't want to be seen doing it, so you do a couple of pirouettes, damning moderate Moslems with faint praise and still condemning them for not stopping extremism in the first place.

An interesting but completely incorrect and bias summary of the gentleman position.