2020 French Terrorist Beheadings and Attacks Thread

[Borderlands of Rojava]

I feel like Muslims are starting to make France part of their own. Not in Government, but in Culture. Of course, they have the right, which I respect, but, like everyone, I don't like the Fact VERY FEW, not all, are not reminding themselves this isn't North Africa or Syria, it's France.

Idk if I would say very few. Theres probably plenty of French Muslims who act normal, but then there's this fucked shit that keeps happening cause someone got their religious sensibilities offended and decided to start killing people.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

It's disrespectful to many Muslims to depict Muhammad in pictures. I don't really see why one would want to anyway, aside from intentionally provoking Muslims. I think it is irresponsible to do so, as it would very likely harm fragile relations with the Muslim community.

That being said, being offended doesn't excuse one from committing murder, and offending religious feelings is not enough to warrant decapitation. I recommend France reinstate the death penalty, at the very least for murder. The terrorist (the one who committed the decapitation) should be sentenced to the guillotine, provided they are found guilty in a court of law. France must make it clear that assaults against its secular state will not be tolerated.

As a preventive measure, France should take religious harmony very seriously and enact laws that make it illegal to promote religious disharmony (on either side), similar to what Singapore successfully does. It should also take the threat of Islamic terrorism far more seriously, any ethnic/religious geographic concentration should be broken up and distributed evenly across the population. This will help "dilute" radicalization. At the same time, enact laws that prohibit religions from spreading subversive and anti-government rhetoric, along with any religious group promoting disharmony. Non-citizens promoting disharmony should be deported and anti-social religious organizations should be banned.

Vive la France!

Thing is, France's many Religions have things some do not want. So combining Law with Religion, especially in France, is a very bad move. Sure, the Arabians can do it, but because they ONLY have one religion.

The Arabians only have one religion? You know there are millions of Christians in the middle east, right?

[Andsed]

This is why religion needs to be outlawed. That teacher had every right to do that, hey, I would've done the same! It just shows how generations of irrational brainwashing can cause major unrest globally for some ridiculous reasons. It angers me to see that people just haven't woken up yet.

While I am not exactly one to defend religion, outlawing it is several steps too far and more likely to kick up a shitstorm then come close to solving anything.

[Penguinya]

What the F*ck?

[Dolgo]

Yes.

I can't believe I'm having this conversation.

OK, is there a 'strong leader' currently that you admire?

If you can't believe you're having this conversation, then don't have it.

As for leaders... It's not just a matter of being strong. You've got to use that strength intelligently. Now what you define as a "strong" leader is probably different than how I do. Sometimes strength may involve the use of force, harsh force, other times, it may be more softer, or very little at all. It depends on the circumstances. I am what you may describe as a "reluctant authoritarian." I'd rather a government not resort to authoritarianism out of habit, but I do accept the need for it when called for... When doing otherwise would jeopardize national security.

Past and present leaders I admire in some capacity (held government office or significant influence), non-exhaustive A–Z:

Arnold Schwarzenegger (USA), Barack Obama (USA), Deng Xiaoping (China), France-Albert René (Seychelles), Franklin D. Roosevelt (USA), Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt), Goh Chok Tong (Singapore), Jacinda Ardern (New Zealand), Jack Layton (Canada), Josip Broz Tito (Yugoslavia), Juan Perón (Argentina), K. Shanmugam (Singapore), Lee Hsien Loong (Singapore), Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore), Lester B. Pearson (Canada), Mackenzie King (Canada), Mahatma Gandhi (India), Michael Bloomberg (USA), Moon Jae-in (South Korea), Muammar Gaddafi (Libya), Nelson Mandela (South Africa), Paul Kagame (Rwanda), Pierre Trudeau (Canada), Rudy Giuliani (USA), Tharman Shanmugaratnam (Singapore), Thomas Sankara (Burkina Faso), Tommy Douglas (Canada), Tony Tan (Singapore), Tsai Ing-wen (Taiwan), and Winston Churchill (UK).

[Nanako Island]

Hello, I'm french and I just recently left high school so I'm really moved and shocked by this terrible event.

The history of Freedom of Speech is one of the most crucial freedoms of France since the 1789 Revolution. Back during the monarchy, everything critizing the kind was censored and you had the real threat of being sent into prison without any trial.

During 1789, one of the first things declared by the National Assembly was freedom of speech, and soon after, thousands of newspapers were created throughout Paris and France.
Each time France had a revolution (which is a significant number), the freedom of speech was always reinstalled by the Republic and it is the only regime in France that guarenteed this freedom.

History of religion in France is also very important.
Based on the 1789 Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen, every citizen of the nation has freedom of religion.
Since 1905, the state and the catholic church (or any religion) are completely seperate, while before hand the Republic had an official religion (catholism).
Why? Because of the very french ideology of "Laïcité" which is a sort of state secularism.
To basically explain it : the states doesn't ban, support, favor religion. Religion has no matter nor place in French politics according to this ideology. It states that religion is part of the "private sphere" and that it has no place in the Republican institutions. It doesn't mean that people can't practice their religion, it just installs that religion is not a political thing. France is not irrevelent towards religions, it just doesn't talk about this because in the Laïcité utopia, religion isn't important. Laïcité is basically an ideology that aims to set religious differences aside and promote unity revoling around the idea of a "nation" rather than around seperate communities. The former is called "Communitarianism" and as far as I know is the ideology that is applied in English-Speaking countries.
In French public schools, a thing such as "Religion class" is just unthinkable. Not that we don't speak about religions, we have history lessons on them, but they are not motivated by any background religious belief. Although christianity is the "core" religion of France, Laïcité basically tries to destroy the differenciation between majorities and minorities.
When in some countries some say "My religion is right", and the other says "No it's mine", Laïcité's answer is "No, you are both wrong: you have freedom of belief, each and every one of you believes what he wants."
The other core principle of Laïcité is that "One's freedom stops when the other's start".

The thing is in france, many are atheists and completely comply to the Laïcité and a large portion of the Christians and Muslims too, but not all of them.
The government belives extermist youths exist because they are segregated by their parents, or outisde factors from the "Republican education", that promotes all things said above, and above all respect for other's belief. The government is trying to create a law to avoid this "ideological separatism" and better include let-down muslim youths to the french schools.

https://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/lutte-contre-les-separatismes-nbsp-les-grands-axes-de-la-loi-annoncee-vendredi-par-emmanuel-macron-20201001 (sorry it's in French. Be advised this media is centre-right)

I dunno why I write this down but it seemed appropritate to me

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Past and present leaders I admire in some capacity (held government office or significant influence), non-exhaustive A–Z:

Arnold Schwarzenegger (USA), Barack Obama (USA), Deng Xiaoping (China), France-Albert René (Seychelles), Franklin D. Roosevelt (USA), Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt), Goh Chok Tong (Singapore), Jacinda Ardern (New Zealand), Jack Layton (Canada), Josip Broz Tito (Yugoslavia), Juan Perón (Argentina), K. Shanmugam (Singapore), Lee Hsien Loong (Singapore), Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore), Lester B. Pearson (Canada), Mackenzie King (Canada), Mahatma Gandhi (India), Michael Bloomberg (USA), Moon Jae-in (South Korea), Muammar Gaddafi (Libya), Nelson Mandela (South Africa), Paul Kagame (Rwanda), Pierre Trudeau (Canada), Rudy Giuliani (USA), Tharman Shanmugaratnam (Singapore), Thomas Sankara (Burkina Faso), Tommy Douglas (Canada), Tony Tan (Singapore), Tsai Ing-wen (Taiwan), and Winston Churchill (UK).

This list is more diverse than Oakland California. It gave me the same reaction as when Joseph Stalin and Ghandi got name dropped a second apart in the song Cult of Personality.

[Dolgo]

Past and present leaders I admire in some capacity (held government office or significant influence), non-exhaustive A–Z:

Arnold Schwarzenegger (USA), Barack Obama (USA), Deng Xiaoping (China), France-Albert René (Seychelles), Franklin D. Roosevelt (USA), Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt), Goh Chok Tong (Singapore), Jacinda Ardern (New Zealand), Jack Layton (Canada), Josip Broz Tito (Yugoslavia), Juan Perón (Argentina), K. Shanmugam (Singapore), Lee Hsien Loong (Singapore), Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore), Lester B. Pearson (Canada), Mackenzie King (Canada), Mahatma Gandhi (India), Michael Bloomberg (USA), Moon Jae-in (South Korea), Muammar Gaddafi (Libya), Nelson Mandela (South Africa), Paul Kagame (Rwanda), Pierre Trudeau (Canada), Rudy Giuliani (USA), Tharman Shanmugaratnam (Singapore), Thomas Sankara (Burkina Faso), Tommy Douglas (Canada), Tony Tan (Singapore), Tsai Ing-wen (Taiwan), and Winston Churchill (UK).

This list is more diverse than Oakland California. It gave me the same reaction as when Joseph Stalin and Ghandi got name dropped a second apart in the song Cult of Personality.

I find wisdom in a wide variety of leaders. Take it for what it is.

[Picairn]

Past and present leaders I admire in some capacity (held government office or significant influence), non-exhaustive A–Z:

Arnold Schwarzenegger (USA), Barack Obama (USA), Deng Xiaoping (China), France-Albert René (Seychelles), Franklin D. Roosevelt (USA), Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt), Goh Chok Tong (Singapore), Jacinda Ardern (New Zealand), Jack Layton (Canada), Josip Broz Tito (Yugoslavia), Juan Perón (Argentina), K. Shanmugam (Singapore), Lee Hsien Loong (Singapore), Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore), Lester B. Pearson (Canada), Mackenzie King (Canada), Mahatma Gandhi (India), Michael Bloomberg (USA), Moon Jae-in (South Korea), Muammar Gaddafi (Libya), Nelson Mandela (South Africa), Paul Kagame (Rwanda), Pierre Trudeau (Canada), Rudy Giuliani (USA), Tharman Shanmugaratnam (Singapore), Thomas Sankara (Burkina Faso), Tommy Douglas (Canada), Tony Tan (Singapore), Tsai Ing-wen (Taiwan), and Winston Churchill (UK).

This list is more diverse than Oakland California. It gave me the same reaction as when Joseph Stalin and Ghandi got name dropped a second apart in the song Cult of Personality.

He admires communists, socialists, neoliberals, right-wing dictators, liberal progressive presidents... Yeah that list is really diverse.

[Resilient Acceleration]

Hello, I'm french and I just recently left high school so I'm really moved and shocked by this terrible event.

The history of Freedom of Speech is one of the most crucial freedoms of France since the 1789 Revolution. Back during the monarchy, everything critizing the kind was censored and you had the real threat of being sent into prison without any trial.

During 1789, one of the first things declared by the National Assembly was freedom of speech, and soon after, thousands of newspapers were created throughout Paris and France.
Each time France had a revolution (which is a significant number), the freedom of speech was always reinstalled by the Republic and it is the only regime in France that guarenteed this freedom.

History of religion in France is also very important.
Based on the 1789 Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen, every citizen of the nation has freedom of religion.
Since 1905, the state and the catholic church (or any religion) are completely seperate, while before hand the Republic had an official religion (catholism).
Why? Because of the very french ideology of "Laïcité" which is a sort of state secularism.
To basically explain it : the states doesn't ban, support, favor religion. Religion has no matter nor place in French politics according to this ideology. It states that religion is part of the "private sphere" and that it has no place in the Republican institutions. It doesn't mean that people can't practice their religion, it just installs that religion is not a political thing. France is not irrevelent towards religions, it just doesn't talk about this because in the Laïcité utopia, religion isn't important. Laïcité is basically an ideology that aims to set religious differences aside and promote unity revoling around the idea of a "nation" rather than around seperate communities. The former is called "Communitarianism" and as far as I know is the ideology that is applied in English-Speaking countries.
In French public schools, a thing such as "Religion class" is just unthinkable. Not that we don't speak about religions, we have history lessons on them, but they are not motivated by any background religious belief. Although christianity is the "core" religion of France, Laïcité basically tries to destroy the differenciation between majorities and minorities.
When in some countries some say "My religion is right", and the other says "No it's mine", Laïcité's answer is "No, you are both wrong: you have freedom of belief, each and every one of you believes what he wants."
The other core principle of Laïcité is that "One's freedom stops when the other's start".

The thing is in france, many are atheists and completely comply to the Laïcité and a large portion of the Christians and Muslims too, but not all of them.
The government belives extermist youths exist because they are segregated by their parents, or outisde factors from the "Republican education", that promotes all things said above, and above all respect for other's belief. The government is trying to create a law to avoid this "ideological separatism" and better include let-down muslim youths to the french schools.

https://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/lutte-contre-les-separatismes-nbsp-les-grands-axes-de-la-loi-annoncee-vendredi-par-emmanuel-macron-20201001 (sorry it's in French. Be advised this media is centre-right)

I dunno why I write this down but it seemed appropritate to me

Actually much thanks, right now most people here aren't even French

[Dolgo]

This list is more diverse than Oakland California. It gave me the same reaction as when Joseph Stalin and Ghandi got name dropped a second apart in the song Cult of Personality.

He admires communists, socialists, neoliberals, right-wing dictators, liberal progressive presidents... Yeah that list is really diverse.

No ideology has a monopoly on wisdom. Effective leadership to me is not ideologically based, but rather based on its accomplishments. Not all aspects of the above leaders I admire.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

I remember hearing that numerous muslim youth disrupted the moment of silence held in French schools for the victims of the Bataclan massacre. I also remember reading about a riot that occurred in a mainly Muslim neighborhood in Belgium after said suspects were arrested.

People rioted because terrorists were arrested. I mean seriously what the hell is going on in Europe?

[The Restored Danelaw]

Actually much thanks, right now most people here aren't even French

Here as in this forum or

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Actually much thanks, right now most people here aren't even French

Here as in this forum or

Yes

[Saiwania]

Muhammad was a real person in the historical record, so its unreasonable to expect him to not ever be depicted if he was a mere mortal at one point. The main point of contention is that no one knows what he truly looked like, beyond best estimates being that he was from so long ago.

There are ways to have Muhammad in a scene in cinema without directly depicting him but its annoying difficult. One interpretation that could be had is that in treating Muhammad too specially, that it is ironically as bad as the idolatry that devout Muslims wish to prevent with regards to their community if it is equivalent or dangerously close to treating him as a deity. Fact is, he was a real person and likely wouldn't have been afforded the same privileges if his life as a Prophet came about when photography existed.

[Ibakobit Xhepn]

I think we need to protect our children from these dreadful religions (Christianity included).
Change my mind.

[Resilient Acceleration]

He admires communists, socialists, neoliberals, right-wing dictators, liberal progressive presidents... Yeah that list is really diverse.

No ideology has a monopoly on wisdom. Effective leadership to me is not ideologically based, but rather based on its accomplishments. Not all aspects of the above leaders I admire.

Rather than "strong leaders" however, I see a strong system as a far better alternative if you're going for one. LKY set up a successful one-party dominant state with minimum corruption that has continued Singapore's policies in relative stability. Tito meanwhile, after he died, yeet.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

I think we need to protect our children from these dreadful religions (Christianity included).
Change my mind.

I'm not here to change your mind. I just wanted to say I agree.

[Picairn]

Rather than "strong leaders" however, I see a strong system as a far better alternative if you're going for one. LKY set up a successful one-party dominant state with minimum corruption that has continued Singapore's policies in relative stability. Tito meanwhile, after he died, yeet.

Institutions over leaders.

*nods* Why Nations Fail would be proud.

[Dolgo]

No ideology has a monopoly on wisdom. Effective leadership to me is not ideologically based, but rather based on its accomplishments. Not all aspects of the above leaders I admire.

Rather than "strong leaders" however, I see a strong system as a far better alternative if you're going for one. LKY set up a successful one-party dominant state with minimum corruption that has continued Singapore's policies in relative stability. Tito meanwhile, after he died, yeet.

I understand.

The question was concerning leadership rather than systems that developed after the leader's time was over. The above list is of people I primarily judge in their time, rather than after. If judging what comes after, the list would be a lot more narrow.

[Nuroblav]

Sad. You blew right past my rant about bad parenting being the main cause of crime, and the role of religion in that, to concentrate on the sensational but insignificant thread subject.

What a shame. It's almost as if I don't read the entire 8 pages before posting

Good post though.

[The Alma Mater]

No, I am saying that if the rest of any group, be they left, right, center, religious, atheist, hetero or homosexual etc. are to have a happy life in a free society we must stop indulging their extremist counterparts. I mean, do you genuinely think that the average French Muslim wants this sort of crap laid at his feet either?

Sofar the few non-trolling muslims who responded to this responded with "I understand why he did it and he was kinda provoked but he went too far".

Seems the disagreement is on a rather fundamental level and not limited to extremists.

[The Alma Mater]

I remember hearing that numerous muslim youth disrupted the moment of silence held in French schools for the victims of the Bataclan massacre. I also remember reading about a riot that occurred in a mainly Muslim neighborhood in Belgium after said suspects were arrested.

ALso note that these terrorists were walkin around openly in said Belgian community for weeks; with most people there being fully aware of who they were and what they did.
On the upside, eventually someone reported their presence to the cops. So there are decent people there.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

I remember hearing that numerous muslim youth disrupted the moment of silence held in French schools for the victims of the Bataclan massacre. I also remember reading about a riot that occurred in a mainly Muslim neighborhood in Belgium after said suspects were arrested.

ALso note that these terrorists were walkin around openly in said Belgian community for weeks; with most people there being fully aware of who they were and what they did.
On the upside, eventually someone reported their presence to the cops. So there are decent people there.

I dont doubt that there are good people in the Muslim community of Europe. But there seems to be a lot more crazies there than in the one here.

[Lost Memories]

No, I am saying that if the rest of any group, be they left, right, center, religious, atheist, hetero or homosexual etc. are to have a happy life in a free society we must stop indulging their extremist counterparts. I mean, do you genuinely think that the average French Muslim wants this sort of crap laid at his feet either?

Sofar the few non-trolling muslims who responded to this responded with "I understand why he did it and he was kinda provoked but he went too far".

Seems the disagreement is on a rather fundamental level and not limited to extremists.

It has to do with poor understanding of the layers of respect.

Respect = admiration, someone or something looked up to as an example to follow.
Respect = obedience, toward an authority, if the authority gives and order who respects the authority follows.
Respect = being humane, not torturing people, not harming others, not being demeaning.

What is being failed here, is the most basic form of respect, the one about being humane.