ISIS attacks in Paris - Are we safe anymore?

[novenary]

Actually, you guys have it backwards. A lot of muslims (the majority actually) leave peacefully like everyone else, but the religion itself is strongly oriented towards conquering the world, killing people refusing to convert, being violent to women, and dying while fighting for islam is considered a holy act. I'm not inventing this, it's all in the kuran, I've seen some excerpts of it and it's just disgusting. There is a peaceful part in it and a violent part, it's simply up to the individual/group to choose which to follow, but the bad name is coming from there.

[Dream of Omnimaga]

Isn't the good part muslim and the bad part islamic?

[novenary]

No, muslim = person who belong to the islamic religion.
Those who follow the violent part of the book are usually called islamists because they want to spread their religion.

[alexgt]

Yeah, I was watching it last night it was really crazy

There are islamic people and then there are radical islamic people DJ

[p4nix]

Those who follow the violent part of the book are usually called islamists because they want to spread their religion.

Just open the bible or any other religious book to read violent stuff.

[novenary]

Well, the difference is that nowadays, christians and jews aren't following these writings in huge organizations, everyone has moved on from religion wars except them.

[p4nix]

In history we had the question (before that ISIS stuff started) if there are any crusades nowadays. Our teacher declared Afghanistan, iraq and more as them.
Well, no matter of that, somehow the things the ISIS do has to be stopped...

[novenary]

I don't know how your teacher made the link, but the reasons for these wars are not to convert the countries to christianity or whatever (which is what the crusades were for), but to stomp sources of worldwide terror. There was abuse, but it's different.

[p4nix]

That's my personal opinion, but I think 'trying to stomp sources of global terror' made it worse. Peace is what we need, not war.

[novenary]

Well I agree, but when a fly keeps harassing you, at one point you get fed up and try to smash it, with more or less success.

By the way I feel like we should move this thread to safe haven, I don't think it's a good idea to leave it public, I don't want to censor opinions and I'd also rather avoid any kind of attack against the site for them.

[Lionel Debroux]

The only sane way to react to such tragedies is refuse to be terrorized, and avoid destroying core aspects of our Western societies, such as democracy, liberty, free speech. Precisely, leading us to destroy ourselves is among the terrorists' goal, so let's not cave in.
Sadly, mass surveillance laws, which have just proved inefficient once again, and will prove inefficient again in the future (because they only aim at catching some consequences, and thoroughly - and predictably - fail at it, but do nothing about the well-identified causes of terrorism), are a giant step in the wrong direction, towards all-out dictatorship without liberty, free speech, democracy... and without safety against terrorists, either.

The TPP, TAFTA, TISA, and other suchlike extreme crap, are giant - and not unrelated, in fact, because the main benefactors of these PoS belong to the same, narrow sociological classes of people (military / finance / some industry classes), to the detriment of 95+% of the population - steps in the wrong direction, too.
Who knows, with people's attention being distracted by terrorist attacks, it might be easier to ram such dangerous international treaties down people's throats up people's asses, eh ?

[Caleb Hansberry]

Yeah, as an american, I'm more concerned about the threat our own government poses when they react to this than actually being attacked (although that may happen too). The whole war on terror and mass surveillance has been a disaster, from the TSA to Afghanistan. I personally don't think the American people have the will to fight, they're weak and docile. They want to put the responsibility for fighting terror on the shoulders of the government and personally have to courage or strong belief in justice, en mass.

Also, Street is right, Islam is a religion of violence, according to it's own book. You can believe what their own book says, or you can believe what they actually *do*; what they believe is clearly death and violence, it's in their creed, as to whether or not they carry it out, obviously some do and some don't - it's correct to say the majority of muslims are peaceful, but with the stuff the Koran says, I think it's an evil religion anyways. While there has been some violence perpetrated by Christians, there's no doubt violence is condemned in the Bible, and I would definitely question if anyone knows of any examples of Christians actually killing people like ISIS is doing.

[p4nix]

Islam is not a religion of violence. It's more like being used as a religion of violence in my opinion.

[Caleb Hansberry]

So all these quotations are all just being taken out of context? http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

[DarkestEx]

By the way I feel like we should move this thread to safe haven, I don't think it's a good idea to leave it public, I don't want to censor opinions and I'd also rather avoid any kind of attack against the site for them.

If you do so, you let them win. They successfully censored free speech then