I didn't realise that companies can pay to make their shop/café a stop for Pokémon....cheap promotion for their food etc. And some kids have been robbed after being lured to a trap in America. Shame that what should be just a game lends itself to corruption.
Why are they even targeting France specifically as their number 1 point of attack? Or have I missed something major?
Ahh okay. I'm just a bit confused about how this "conflict" will end, I can't see a possible scenario in which it can.
It won't, France only allowing 99% of non EU immigrants live in ghettos is the biggest problem. The ghettos in France make our estates look amazing.
France has a huge muslim contingent from Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco etc. They have a much more secular system than our "multiculturism" There is a huge area in Paris that just like Molenbeek in Brussels have very high muslim populations. I think many people think this is something new, something recent but it isn't. It is just that recently it is much easier to travel and move people in numbers around and so it has become much more practical and thus provided more opportunity for this sort of thing to happen. Sykes-Picot is one of the more recent problems often quoted by apologists. A reason to act on their ideology and it is nothing to do with recent wars. Recent wars just give another boost to what was already there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partitioning_of_the_Ottoman_Empire
It goes back way further than the media likes to say. It is linked back further than when the Moors took Spain Portugal and part of France. The idealogy that Islamists adhere to is a strict compliance with the Quran and the Arabs advance into North Africa was just after the words of the Quran are said to have been "verbally revealed" by god to Muhammed. After that the Moors advance into Portugal Spain and Southern France. It is deep rooted and hasn't moved much away from those very early beginnings. Modern Muslims do not adhere to a strict compliance iterpretation. They adhere to the rules but not the killing maiming etc. although you still see stonings and such in modern Arab countries in compliance to the book. Islamists do adhere strictly to the words. What the book says is what should happen and should always happen and it is not open to question or evolution. The Quran is not the bible which has been altered over time to suit. It is as it originally was and most people would benefit from reading it to know exactly what they are faced with instead of thinking liberal nice thoughts about discussions and persuasion.
Berlin (AFP) - A German journalist who witnessed the Nice attack said he saw a motorcyclist chase the killer truck and try to enter the cabin but fall and end up under the wheels. https://www.yahoo.com/news/motorcyclist-crushed-trying-stop-killer-truck-115309743.html
*shakes head* if you listened to the whole excruciating interview with her, she was a dick. The Sky producer that kept her on so long should have been sacked. I was listening to it live gobsmacked.
Islam needs a reformation, but sadly it's set up to prevent that, in that one of it's core tenets is that questioning the word of the prophet is forbidden and punishable by death. It's a sorry, sorry situation, and we're in a position where murderous nutcases, working alone, have an excuse and a 'cause' to label themselves with to commit these horrific acts.
Fair enough,didn't hear it,just saying shock can cause all sorts of reactions. You might want to shake your head a little less though - not good for you.
My friend out there has just wandered to the beach - there's warships out in the sea and a terrible silence. Apparently the guy deliberately drove into the carousel packed with kids.
My niece had two children with a Turkish partner, but she had them christened as Roman Catholics when they split up. She thought they'd be lumbered by the Muslim faith and wanted them to be free.
It isn't, that is the Islamist view. Arabs have said that they need to sort out the teachings and education and interpretation of it. There are several different interpretations of the same book and many muslims believe that the Torah, Quran and Bible are all gifts from the same god to the people. The Quran mentions many of the same people within it that is in the bible. Jesus, Moses Mary etc. Christianity is not the enemy of Islam. While the words of Islam are written for all to see it is for teachers to interpret the meaning (and hidden meaning) of the words. They believe that is beyond human thinking to understand the words as they are written and so it needs interpreting and guidance. that the words can only be interpreted by God and not through human thought alone. So it is those that interpret the Quran that "evolve" the meaning of the words. The words themselves remain the same and this is why it is not as simple as Islam is evil because the book says..........so they all believe 'X'. It is those that interpret those words in a way that takes a lot of the text literally as well as throwing in a handful of added dangerous interpretation that are the cause of the problems. In a way you can say the religion is at fault because of this belief that you have to go by the interptation you are taught by your Imam, Muffasir and their interpretation is called Tafsir. This is why you find extremists coming from certain places and not others. Hotbeds of radicalisation because the teachings in a particular mosque are interpreting the text in a certain way which then leads many people from that mosque to follow that interpretation. So the focus on the text and what it says is not really the problem. It is those who interpret the text in a way that makes their "pupils" follow an extreme version of interpretation. Does Islam say (really mean) kill the infidels: http://www.justaskislam.com/32/does-islam-say-kill-the-infidels/ Can any muslim interpret the Quran accurately: https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/1504/can-any-muslim-interpret-the-quran-accurately
Well exactly. That's the issue (in bold). Hence why it's important to note that the IS are Sunni, and as such - along with all schools of Sunni jurisprudence - view the Shia as polytheists and heretics due to their continued worship of the 12 Imams. Indeed, the Quran extorts to 'kill polytheists wherever you find them' [Sura 9:5] therefore, it is simple for the IS fanatics to justify their ongoing persecution of the Shia alongside any, and all, other religion. No Shia in the world would support the IS, that would be akin to Jewish Germans supporting the Nazis. Therein lies a key part of the issue. The religion isn't even able to sort out what it is and where it goes forward within itself, let alone the rest of the world, hence why there are far more terrorist incidents in Iraq, Syria etc etc than there are here.
IS might be Sunni but there are Sunni and Shia extremists and not all Sunni or Shia are extremist. Again it is interpretation Think about Christianity and its many different branches that we have these days. However they all have slightly different books. Muslims have one book and one text and you are doing the non muslim thing of reading the words as we normally do. Because something says kill it does not mean that is what it is suggesting to do literally. Both Shia and Sunni have condemnded terrorist attacks and while you are right about IS they are not the only extremist group. They all have their own extremist groups. We really need to tackle our lack of understanding that interpretation is just that. It isn't a new book of interpretations that is written down and paased on. It is a verbal interpretation that is passed from one to another. The text is always and has always been the same and should not be taken at face value. Think about the referendum. Surely somewhere there is something in law written down that says we must do this then this then this. You would think so and of course somewhere there will be however we then get 2 barrister teams that will challenge each other with different interpretations of what that law means. If it was as simple as going by the law book then we wouldn't need a challenge over rules. Of course a judge makes the final decision on the interpretation however in religion (quite handy) the judge is not physical. The judge is the God and that is where the problem with religion lies. There is no physical final word instruction and so the 2 interpretations can both lay claim to be the right interpretation. I don't have the answers but clearly muslims by their own admittance have to sort out this problem themselves because outside interference etc is not trusted. Quilliam the government funded thinktank is not trusted because it is funded by non muslims. I suspect this will never go away in the same way that racism will never go away but there must be a way to move forward limiting it's effect.
