Paris attacks

Totton Linnet

Totton Linnet

New member
Silver Subscriber
It is not because of France's involvement in Africa and Syria per se...it is because they have a great many Arabs in Paris.
 
B

bybee

New member
Selaphiel said:
Conservative Christians on this forum saying things like "But it doesn't change reality" is adorable.

How do you know what my experience of Islam is? What is your experience with Islam that makes you so extremely qualified?

I can agree that warfare has been a central part of Islamic history, but this is not warfare. These are meaningless attacks on civilian targets with the sole purpose of killing as many as possible. That is condemned by Islam.
Click to expand...

Meaningless? Oh I do not think so! They are meant to spread terror and confusion. They are meant to demoralize the people.
Islam specifically promotes conversion by any means possible.
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
Expecting people who are (a) often inbred, (b) resentful of others, (c) despise their corrupted societies and (d) ALL all of whom believe their religion will subjugate the earth, to come into those same societies and integrate peacefully among people they feel entitled to rule is suicidally stupid.

Of course we all know that it's being done on purpose to have the exact effect that it is having right now. The only difference between Americans and Europeans is that, for the most part, Americans are still individually and heavily armed. The global elite are going to have to try a slightly different angle to pull it off over here outside of the cities they already control through Democrats, where the same kind of public bloodbath is just a matter of time.
 
Last edited:
OCTOBER23

OCTOBER23

New member
The way of Peace they know not.

Pray for the peace of Paris.

OBAMA ADMITTED THAT HE WAS A MOSLEM.

The Saudis bragged that they would have a man in the Whitehouse .

His position of influence has been bought and paid for.

Fortunately , the Senate is giving him a hard time executing his program.
 
J

jeffblue101

New member
http://www.wsj.com/articles/paris-a...h-president-francois-hollande-says-1447498080
PARIS—French President François Hollande on Saturday blamed Islamic State for the terrorist attacks across Paris that left at least 127 people dead, and vowed to retaliate.

“It is an act of war that was waged by a terrorist army, a jihadist army, by Daesh, against France,” Mr. Hollande said, using an Arabic name for Islamic State. “This act of war was prepared and planned from the outside, with accomplices inside,” he added, saying France would respond to the attacks.

“France, because it was freely, cowardly attacked, will be merciless against the terrorists,” Mr. Hollande said in an address to the nation broadcast on French TV. “France will triumph over barbarism.”

OJ-AC507_FRATTA_9U_20151114071811.jpg
Click to expand...
at least the French President is not as delusional as Selaphiel, in recognizing these terror attacks as an act of war.
 
Selaphiel

Selaphiel

Well-known member
bybee said:
.
Islam specifically promotes conversion by any means possible.
Click to expand...

They promote conversion through murdering of innocents? I'm gonna need a citation on that.

There is warfare in Islam, but there are also fairly strict rules for it. The murdering of innocents in this fashion is absolutely condemned.

This could happen in London also. You are an unarmed populace.
Click to expand...

How would US gun laws prevent this? They opened fire with assault rifles in a concert venue. Most people barely knew what had happened before several people were dead, they thought the sounds were part of the concert at first.

This US fantasy that having a gun at home will prevent these sorts of attacks are ridiculous at best. The only thing we see is that gun related crimes are much higher in your part of the world than they are here.
 
lovemeorhateme

lovemeorhateme

Well-known member
Nick M said:
You certainly did. However, defense against muslims is not genocide. We have no interest in their extermination. But they have one in yours. And I am willing to do whatever is needed against those that cannot be bargained with or reasoned with.

As for the genocide comment, I will now find out if you are ashamed of God.

Numbers 31

So there were recruited from the divisions of Israel one thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. 6 Then Moses sent them to the war, one thousand from each tribe; he sent them to the war with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, with the holy articles and the signal trumpets in his hand. 7 And they warred against the Midianites, just as the Lord commanded Moses, and they killed all the males. 8 They killed the kings of Midian with the rest of those who were killed—Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Midian. Balaam the son of Beor they also killed with the sword.

9 And the children of Israel took the women of Midian captive, with their little ones, and took as spoil all their cattle, all their flocks, and all their goods. 10 They also burned with fire all the cities where they dwelt, and all their forts. 11 And they took all the spoil and all the booty—of man and beast.

12 Then they brought the captives, the booty, and the spoil to Moses, to Eleazar the priest, and to the congregation of the children of Israel, to the camp in the plains of Moab by the Jordan, across from Jericho. 13 And Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the congregation, went to meet them outside the camp. 14 But Moses was angry with the officers of the army, with the captains over thousands and captains over hundreds, who had come from the battle.

15 And Moses said to them: “Have you kept all the women alive? 16 Look, these women caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the Lord in the incident of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man intimately. 18 But keep alive for yourselves all the young girls who have not known a man intimately.




Moses is doing as he is told.

Deuteronomy 20

10 “When you go near a city to fight against it, then proclaim an offer of peace to it. 11 And it shall be that if they accept your offer of peace, and open to you, then all the people who are found in it shall be placed under tribute to you, and serve you. 12 Now if the city will not make peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it. 13 And when the Lord your God delivers it into your hands, you shall strike every male in it with the edge of the sword. 14 But the women, the little ones, the livestock, and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall plunder for yourself; and you shall eat the enemies’ plunder which the Lord your God gives you. 15 Thus you shall do to all the cities which are very far from you, which are not of the cities of these nations.

16 “But of the cities of these peoples which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive, 17 but you shall utterly destroy them: the Hittite and the Amorite and the Canaanite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite, just as the Lord your God has commanded you, 18 lest they teach you to do according to all their abominations which they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord your God.

Like the muslims, they reject the offer of peace.
Click to expand...

Let me remind you that this is in regards to a post made on this thread which stated that we should 'nuke Gaza and Iran'. Nuclear weapons don't discriminate, they obliterate entire civilian populations. So please explain to me how that isn't about the extermination of large Muslim populations?

I'm not ashamed of God, but that doesn't mean I have to accept your warped view that we would be justified to murder millions of innocent people.
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
When the Allahu Akbar boys opened fire, Paris was talking about the climate-change conference due to start later this month, when the world's leaders will fly in to "solve" a "problem" that doesn't exist rather than to address the one that does. (Mark Steyn)
Click to expand...

And all on purpose.
 
lovemeorhateme

lovemeorhateme

Well-known member
Nazaroo said:
Its wise to be cautious in military decisions and claims.

The authority here is indeed Matthew - a church compilation and final issue gospel book
designed for Liturgical use.

Matthew is the only "gospel" that puts the word "church" (ekklesia) in Jesus' mouth,
during His earthly ministry. Some see that as ahistorical.

The famous "Sermon on the Mount" cannot be a historical speech,
because it presumes a post Jewish Christian audience of believers.
Yet in Matthew's chronology its the first public speech He gave,
before He could have had any followers except a few disciples who viewed him
as a Rabbi and teacher.

Its based on a rewriting of Luke's "Sermon on the Plain".
Many other sayings which originally had a historical context in other gospels like Luke and Mark,
have been incorporated into Matthew's "sermon" and stripped of their original context.
Additionally, the author of the Matthew-sermon 'ad-libs' quite a bit, based on
material from James' Letter to the Twelve Tribes, teachings from Paul and other apostles,
and even the Book of Enoch.

The Sermon is not false, but does reflect advanced and post-resurrection thinking
within the Early Church, which was largely Jewish but cut off from the mainstream temple cult at the time.

I am going to suggest that if we understand "Matthew's" purpose,
which is to create a handy teaching 'catechism' of many of Jesus' most important teachings,
mostly focussing on behaviour and rules and guidelines for the Early Church,
we can appreciate what you've quoted here as meant to be applied within the
Christian community, not as a hard rule for dealing with those outside the Church.
In some sense, Matthew uses hyperbole and exaggeration for dramatic purpose
and emphasis, but might not be safe to apply literally:

For instance, no modern Christian thinks one should actually cut off his hand or foot
to control sinful temptation.

Likewise, turning the other cheek is a great guideline for living in the Christian community,
but hardly useful as a national "war-rule" or defence strategy for armies.


I suggest that you also note carefully what Matthew has REMOVED from
the Sermon on the Plain of Luke, namely virtually all of the 'social gospel',
i.e., the good news to the POOR, and Matthew also deletes large amounts
of Luke's material on the status of women.

In other words, Matthew caters to wealthy Jews whom he wants to attract into the new
Church,
but sacrifices the really 'hard sayings' of Jesus on rich people and women
in order to make his version of the 'church gospel' more palatable to middle class
and upper class Romans and Jews.

______________________________

as a footnote, I'm going to add that even the short section you quoted has two non-historical anomalies in it:
It mentions "tax-collectors" long before Jesus ever dealt with one, and the idea that they could even
be forgiven was resolved,
and it mentions "pagans" long before the early church had to deal with that question....

This is a double-indication of ahistorical composition.
Click to expand...

I see. So to worm your way out of your obligation to love your enemies, you question the authority of scripture and twist the meaning of what was written.

The Bible has plenty more to say about killing innocent people:
There are six things the Lord hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
a false witness who pours out lies
and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.
- Proverbs 6:16-19

Now, would you agree that nuking a country will result in the shedding of innocent blood?
 
D

disturbo

BANNED
Banned
Dona Bate said:
Apart from being born on opposite sides of the religious spectrum I can see no difference between extremists Muslims or Nazaroo, Angel4Truth, Nick M and any other excuse for a human being calling for extermination of half the earths population.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
Incredibly, Obama said today that the Islamic State (ISIS) is not getting stronger: “we have contained them.” He is either in an early stage of dementia or he is one of them. I submit that it is the latter. In either case, Americans must be ready: lock and load. It’s not just in Paris, it’s here: Garland, Texas, Chattanooga… yesterday, an Ohio Muslim was arrested for plotting to kill U.S. soldiers and bomb churches and schools. (Pamela Geller)
Click to expand...
 
rocketman

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
disturbo said:
Why do you blame everything on liberals?
Click to expand...

It is the liberal ideology that coddles, embraces, & shows tolerance for the danger in their midst. It is liberals that have chosen to embrace radical islam instead of recognizing it for the danger it poses to the civilized world. It is liberals that believe that disarming societies will make society safe, when the reality is just the opposite, they turn all citizens into sheep for the wolves to slaughter. It is the liberal that believes in an open border policy to their own peril, thinking somehow that openness & diversity will produce cultural assimilation ...do you need more reasons why liberalism is a mental disorder? Are you really that dense that you don't understand the culpability liberals hold for creating the environment where the enemy can move amongst us unhampered? I am surprised you had to ask really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top