What's new

France: Teacher beheaded, police shoot dead suspected killer

It's a bloody religious war. It's being waged for centuries. It will go on for centuries. Why antoganize somebody in the name of free speech when you clearly know it will hurt their feelings. What kind of civil behaviour is that? West takes pride in being civil and courteous. Mocking their own religion gives them the right to mock others? How is that you can draw cartoons to antoganize while be politically correct in every sphere of life?

On the other side of the coin, Followers of Islam are easy bait. They can be riled up easily to the point of murder. Is that insecurity or fear? Insecure about what? Islam is the largest religion and is growing. The Ummah or the religion without borders rhetoric is just that a rhetoric. It doesn't help anyone. It doesn't even exist as we saw for decades. Infact it hurts the rest of the muslims when a lunatic tries to be a god's soldier and dies a miserable death.


That is a very good question. We are moving toward a more PC world, and the targets for lampooning are growing smaller and smaller. Used to be able to joke about blacks, Irish, Pk's, women and all sorts, now must be really difficult to be a comedian. Only legit targets left might be religions which are still fair game. Vive la France!
 
Paris, France – The gruesome killing of a teacher by an 18-year-old suspect of Chechen origin is testing the country’s fragile relationship with its Muslim minority, with growing fears of collective punishment.

The teenager attacked Samuel Paty, a 47-year-old father, in broad daylight on Friday, beheading him near his school in Conflans-Sainte-Honorine, a suburb about 15 miles (24km) from the centre of a Paris.

There has been an outpouring of grief and shock among top officials; Paty on Wednesday posthumously received the Legion d’Honneur, France’s highest honour, in a ceremony attended by President Emmanuel Macron. Thousands have attended protests.

Paty’s attacker had been angered that he showed his pupils caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.

In the days after the killing, the government launched a crackdown against Muslim organisations while vigilante groups have attacked mosques; places of worship in Beziers and Bordeaux have been placed under police protection after having been threatened with violence.

Tensions between the state and France’s Muslims, the largest Muslim minority in Europe, have deepened.

They were already on a downward trend after Macron, on October 2, launched a plan against what he called “Islamist separatism” and said Islam was “in crisis” across the world.

Muslims fear Paty’s tragic death is already being weaponised to advance a government policy they worry conflates Islam with “terrorism”.

Ad
“Muslims are being targeted,” Yasser Louati, a French Muslim activist, told Al Jazeera, adding he believed Macron was “using Islamophobia to power his campaign.”

On Monday, the French government said it was strengthening its crackdown on suspected “extremists”, carrying out multiple raids and threatening a mass expulsion of more than 200 people.

More than 50 Muslim organisations are being targeted; the “Cheikh Yassine Collective”, an organisation has already been banned in the wake of the killing. The group’s founder, Abdelhakim Sefrioui, is being held by police for publishing a video on YouTube insulting Paty.

But there are more surprising names on the list.

Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has proposed to ban the Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF), an association that tracks anti-Muslim hate crimes, in a move that more than 50 civil society groups and academics have warned against.

In an interview with French radio station Europe 1, Darmanin lambasted CCIF as an “enemy of the republic”, adding it was one of several organisations he would dissolve at Macron’s personal request.

CCIF condemned Darmanin’s language as slander, stating the government was “criminalising the fight against Islamophobia”.

Darmanin, who was appointed in July during a cabinet reshuffle, routinely raises eyebrows for comments appealing to conservative and far-right parties.

In an interview with BFMTV Tuesday evening, he said he was “shocked” to see Halal and Kosher food aisles in supermarkets, which he believes contributes to separatism in France, comments that were instantly mocked on social media.

But there are fears recent government actions contribute to a discourse that endangers Muslim lives.

“What is going in France at the moment is unprecedented,” activist and co-founder of CCIF, Marwan Muhammed wrote on Twitter last week. “Fundamental freedoms are at stake, as the government is focused on stigmatising and criminalising Muslim communities.”

Many viewed the government’s vigorous and accelerated response to Friday’s attack as a dire warning that the law could be manipulated to target Muslims more generally.

The crackdown has echoes of France’s response to the deadly November 2015 attacks in Paris by ISIL. Human rights groups criticised those measures, which saw mass arrests and raids under emergency rule, saying they yielded few results and left Muslims feeling like second-class citizens.

During Wednesday’s eulogy, Macron remembered Paty as someone who “loved books, loved knowledge”.
Originally intent on becoming a researcher, Paty chose instead to follow the same path of his parents and become a teacher.

Paty ultimately was killed, Macron said, “because he made the choice to teach.”

He had shown the caricatures during a lesson about free speech.

Muslims believe that any depiction of the Prophet is blasphemous.

According to reports, Paty advised Muslim students who might be offended to leave the room or look away during this part of the discussion, as a measure of sensitivity.

The attacker posted a photo of the decapitation on Twitter before being shot and killed the police. According to French media, the teenager had been in touch with Paty before the killing.

Fifteen people have been arrested as part of an investigation into the killing, including the assailant’s family members.

The attack also follows two stabbings last month outside the former offices of the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, which republished cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in September at the start of the trial for those suspected involvement in the January 2015 attacks which killed 17 people.

In his anticipated October 2 speech, Macron sought to address “radicalisation”.

The new law he is proposing to push religion further out of education and the public sector in France, aims to strengthen “laicite”, France’s strict separation of church and state.

It would, among other things, let the state monitor international funding coming into French mosques, limit homeschooling to prevent Muslims schools from being run by what Macron cited as “religious extremists”, and create a special certificate programme for imams to be trained in France.

Mame-Fatou Niang, an associate professor of French studies at Carnegie Mellon University, told Al Jazeera the government was not simply “going to war against terrorists”.

“Rather they’re taking these seeds of division planted by terrorists to erase any grey areas and create a completely polarised society … it’s a declaration against not only fundamentalists but against Muslims in general.”

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2020/10/22/teacher-killing-islamophobia?__twitter_impression=true
 
So I read in the news that two Muslim cousins were stabbed under the Eiffel Tower by two french women while they shouted “dirty Arabs” at them.

They are now looking at 10 years in jail. But here is the funny thing, they were charged with “wilful gang violence”

Not terrorism, not racially motivated GBH etc nothing to highlight that their crime was related to the victim being Muslims. Simply “wilful gang violence”.
 
Should be charged with hate crime. I dont know if they will serve 10 years. Shame
 
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56325254


Samuel Paty: French schoolgirl admits lying about murdered teacher

———————

The girl, whose complaints sparked an online campaign against Paty, has now admitted that she was not in the class.


Agreed. Trying to pass off a teacher showing abusive pictures of a holy figure in a school as teaching freedom of expression is semantics at best, and quite shocking.

It turns out he told the Muslim kids they were free to leave the class or close their eyes before he showed the cartoons. And the girl - whose father started the campaign - lied that she was in class and forced to look at them.

I have no problem with him showing offensive caricatures personally, hope he and his family are at peace with his decision.

I hope the parents of that kid are at peace now. I won't blame the kid considering the lunatic Dad she lives with.

I also hope you are at peace now.

Have you bothered to look at the Hebdo cartoons. I recently had a look to see what the fuss was all about and it only increased my disgust for those who're offended enough to kill. There are a few nasty ones featuring Muslims. But the ones I could find of the Prophet were sympathetic to him in fact - about his message being distorted and so on.

By that stretch, the ones directed at Jews and Jesus were perversely nastier. And France is a Christian country, isn't it. Couldn't find anything on Hindu gods. Maybe they don't think it's important or relevant enough.

In some ways, I have some sympathy for many Muslims. If they could only actually have a look at the cartoons. But this is like a Catch-22 thing. They can't even look at it, because their religion apparently forbids it...
 
It turns out he told the Muslim kids they were free to leave the class or close their eyes before he showed the cartoons. And the girl - whose father started the campaign - lied that she was in class and forced to look at them.



I hope the parents of that kid are at peace now. I won't blame the kid considering the lunatic Dad she lives with.

I also hope you are at peace now.

Have you bothered to look at the Hebdo cartoons. I recently had a look to see what the fuss was all about and it only increased my disgust for those who're offended enough to kill. There are a few nasty ones featuring Muslims. But the ones I could find of the Prophet were sympathetic to him in fact - about his message being distorted and so on.

By that stretch, the ones directed at Jews and Jesus were perversely nastier. And France is a Christian country, isn't it. Couldn't find anything on Hindu gods. Maybe they don't think it's important or relevant enough.

In some ways, I have some sympathy for many Muslims. If they could only actually have a look at the cartoons. But this is like a Catch-22 thing. They can't even look at it, because their religion apparently forbids it...

You must have sight issues. The Prophet(pbuh) was shown as a terrorist with a bomb. Hebdo is a disgrace. I dont support violence against them but in the real world you want to abuse peoples faiths, there will always be a looney or two will use violence against you, something Hebdo must accept.
 
I hope the parents of that kid are at peace now. I won't blame the kid considering the lunatic Dad she lives with.

I also hope you are at peace now.

so much moral indignation and so much umbrage but so little sense. It is irrelevant that that the child was present or not, as the teacher did show the caricatures in the classroom. As if she was really present, then you would have supported the act?
 
You must have sight issues. The Prophet(pbuh) was shown as a terrorist with a bomb. Hebdo is a disgrace. I dont support violence against them but in the real world you want to abuse peoples faiths, there will always be a looney or two will use violence against you, something Hebdo must accept.

Have you seen this. You might be referring to the Danish one.

so much moral indignation and so much umbrage but so little sense. It is irrelevant that that the child was present or not, as the teacher did show the caricatures in the classroom. As if she was really present, then you would have supported the act?

I find it admirable that you are able to take the offence you feel towards those that offend your faith, and apply to followers of other faiths.

It's really admirable. Especially after your experience with the guys who came to buy your AC.

Lesser men would have fallen by the wayside and bent their principles. Are you on some diet of Vipassana that allows this clarity of principles?
 
Have you seen this. You might be referring to the Danish one.



I find it admirable that you are able to take the offence you feel towards those that offend your faith, and apply to followers of other faiths.

It's really admirable. Especially after your experience with the guys who came to buy your AC.

Lesser men would have fallen by the wayside and bent their principles. Are you on some diet of Vipassana that allows this clarity of principles?

I dont keep up with what these secular extremist nutters draw but Im sure there was one linking the Prophet(pbuh) to terrorism , another labelling him as gay and others too. The point is 99% of Muslims will be disgusted but will ignore, however there will always be someone or some group which will use this as an excuse for violence. If I was drawing cartoons of RSS Hindus or Jewish Zionists, I would worry one of them will attack me. This is common sense.
 
I dont keep up with what these secular extremist nutters draw but Im sure there was one linking the Prophet(pbuh) to terrorism , another labelling him as gay and others too. The point is 99% of Muslims will be disgusted but will ignore, however there will always be someone or some group which will use this as an excuse for violence. If I was drawing cartoons of RSS Hindus or Jewish Zionists, I would worry one of them will attack me. This is common sense.

I've seen the cartoon that you refer to and to me it looked like a gay Muslim being depicted and nothing including the caption suggested it had anything to do with the Prophet.

You use the term secular with the same contempt that many BJP fans do. Ever think of dropping here and meeting with elements from the Bajrang Dal etc?
 
I've seen the cartoon that you refer to and to me it looked like a gay Muslim being depicted and nothing including the caption suggested it had anything to do with the Prophet.

You use the term secular with the same contempt that many BJP fans do. Ever think of dropping here and meeting with elements from the Bajrang Dal etc?

Exact details of drawings are not so important, as they are drawings of hate which is clear.

Extremism comes in all forms, secluarists can be just if not more extreme than religious people. Hebdo is a perfect example of this, using secularism to peddle hate in the disguise of freedom of speech.

Id rather not meet any Bajrang Dal, far too tempting to use violence against such clowns.
 
Exact details of drawings are not so important, as they are drawings of hate which is clear.

Extremism comes in all forms, secluarists can be just if not more extreme than religious people. Hebdo is a perfect example of this, using secularism to peddle hate in the disguise of freedom of speech.

Id rather not meet any Bajrang Dal, far too tempting to use violence against such clowns.

I struggle to see how the separation of religion and state can be extreme. If you mean anti-religious sentiment, then sure that can be extremism, but that isn't secularism- it is anti-religious extremism. That being said, nowhere in the world is anti-religion nearly as bad as religious extremism. The closest thing is what China does to the Uyghurs, something which you vehemently defend. Shame the Uyghurs aren't part of your ummah.
 
I struggle to see how the separation of religion and state can be extreme. If you mean anti-religious sentiment, then sure that can be extremism, but that isn't secularism- it is anti-religious extremism. That being said, nowhere in the world is anti-religion nearly as bad as religious extremism. The closest thing is what China does to the Uyghurs, something which you vehemently defend. Shame the Uyghurs aren't part of your ummah.

Read carefully. I suggested secularists can also be extremists as we have seen ample proof from the French. Spreading hate or inciting hatred is a form of extremism.

Stick to the topic, China issue is far too complex for you.
 
When was the last time secularist killed someone when his/her beliefs were challenged
 
When was the last time secularist killed someone when his/her beliefs were challenged

Israel and India are and have been doing this all the time. USA and it's allies have killed 4 million in their war of terror , one of their reasons why these people are against our way of life. Extremism doesnt have be only when someones challenges your belief lol.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Read carefully. I suggested secularists can also be extremists as we have seen ample proof from the French. Spreading hate or inciting hatred is a form of extremism.

Stick to the topic, China issue is far too complex for you.

Secularism is the separation of religion and state. France is pretty anti-religion, that is not secularism. And no, cartoons aren't inciting hatred, and it's not specific to religion, they lampoon everything. It is part of their satirical tradition. So to suggest religion is solely being targeted is a lie.

It is not too complex, you just can't accept that they're Pakistan's biggest ally and are doing such atrocities to Muslims.

Israel and India are and have been doing this all the time. USA and it's allies have killed 4 million in their war of terror , one of their reasons why these people are against our way of life. Extremism doesnt have be only when someones challenges your belief lol.

Israel isn't killing Palestinians because of secularism, they are doing it because they're a fascist regime and want to expand their illegal occupation. India aren't killing Muslims because of secularism (and India is secular in name only), they are doing it because of Hindu nationalism. You really don't know what secularism means.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Secularism is the separation of religion and state. France is pretty anti-religion, that is not secularism. And no, cartoons aren't inciting hatred, and it's not specific to religion, they lampoon everything. It is part of their satirical tradition. So to suggest religion is solely being targeted is a lie.

I know what secularism is. You are missing my simple point, again read carefully. I suggest Secularists can be extremists too, pretty simple. Depicting a Prophet followed by nearly 2billion as an extremist is inciting hate esp in current times. Feel free to disagree, its just your opinion.


Israel isn't killing Palestinians because of secularism, they are doing it because they're a fascist regime and want to expand their illegal occupation. India aren't killing Muslims because of secularism (and India is secular in name only), they are doing it because of Hindu nationalism. You really don't know what secularism means.

Where he worked is irrelevant, you know you have no arguments so you try to obfuscate.

They are Secular states who are killing people because of the religion they follow and because they want to occupy their land. Im giving this example to prove the reasons for killings doesnt take away from being an extremist. You have poor knowledge of geo-politics and the mentality of those states.
 
Israel and India are and have been doing this all the time. USA and it's allies have killed 4 million in their war of terror , one of their reasons why these people are against our way of life. Extremism doesnt have be only when someones challenges your belief lol.

None of these you mentioned above are killing anyone in the name of secularism. None. They have killed millions of people. But not in the name of secularism. Also Israel is a jewish state
 
Secularism is the separation of religion and state. France is pretty anti-religion, that is not secularism. And no, cartoons aren't inciting hatred, and it's not specific to religion, they lampoon everything. It is part of their satirical tradition. So to suggest religion is solely being targeted is a lie.

It is not too complex, you just can't accept that they're Pakistan's biggest ally and are doing such atrocities to Muslims.



Israel isn't killing Palestinians because of secularism, they are doing it because they're a fascist regime and want to expand their illegal occupation. India aren't killing Muslims because of secularism (and India is secular in name only), they are doing it because of Hindu nationalism. You really don't know what secularism means.

Great points tubby. However you talking to a wall
 
France’s anti religion tradition is steeped in history, going back to the revolution of 1789. They hate religion and tradition and the age of “Enlightenment” has enlightened them so much, they will not care what it takes but they will continue being offensive to those who believe.

That’s how it is...it’s pretty tragic, but that’s how it is!
 
I know what secularism is. You are missing my simple point, again read carefully. I suggest Secularists can be extremists too, pretty simple. Depicting a Prophet followed by nearly 2billion as an extremist is inciting hate esp in current times. Feel free to disagree, its just your opinion.




They are Secular states who are killing people because of the religion they follow and because they want to occupy their land. Im giving this example to prove the reasons for killings doesnt take away from being an extremist. You have poor knowledge of geo-politics and the mentality of those states.

Again, there is no such thing as secular extremism. I suppose I can think of a hypothetical scenario where some armed dissidents performed a coup in a theocratic country and demanded secularism, that could perhaps be 'secular extremism', but you obviously don't understand what 'secularism' and 'extremism' are. Cartoons aren't extremism. If people consider cartoons tantamount to violence and a personal attack on them, that is a problem with the people, not cartoons. Also, French satirical publishers, such as Charlie Hebdo, lampoon everybody. Religions (including Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc), politicians (Macron, LePenn, Erdogan, Obama, Trump, etc) and many other things, I'm sure. To suggest it's uniquely an Islamic thing is wrong. And again, it isn't extremism anyway.

Wait, you say secular states, then you say that they're discriminating on basis of religion. You're making no sense. Again, secularism is just the separation of religion and state. Unless you can find examples of Israel and India saying 'we are killing minorities for the glory of separation of religion and state', your baseless opinion is just that- baseless. You obviously have no idea what secularism is, again. And Israel and India are examples of ethnonationalist and Hindu nationalist extremism respectively. Not secularism. You are deluded.
 
France’s anti religion tradition is steeped in history, going back to the revolution of 1789. They hate religion and tradition and the age of “Enlightenment” has enlightened them so much, they will not care what it takes but they will continue being offensive to those who believe.

That’s how it is...it’s pretty tragic, but that’s how it is!

While I agree that they may be a bit too anti-religion, you are still free to practice your religion in almost every case. That is not the case under many Islamic countries if you are a minority. Your religious rights as a Muslim in France are far more than your religious rights as a minority religion in most Muslim countries.

Also, let's not act like cartoons are anything close to apostasy and blasphemy laws.
 
Again, there is no such thing as secular extremism. I suppose I can think of a hypothetical scenario where some armed dissidents performed a coup in a theocratic country and demanded secularism, that could perhaps be 'secular extremism', but you obviously don't understand what 'secularism' and 'extremism' are. Cartoons aren't extremism. If people consider cartoons tantamount to violence and a personal attack on them, that is a problem with the people, not cartoons. Also, French satirical publishers, such as Charlie Hebdo, lampoon everybody. Religions (including Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc), politicians (Macron, LePenn, Erdogan, Obama, Trump, etc) and many other things, I'm sure. To suggest it's uniquely an Islamic thing is wrong. And again, it isn't extremism anyway.

Wait, you say secular states, then you say that they're discriminating on basis of religion. You're making no sense. Again, secularism is just the separation of religion and state. Unless you can find examples of Israel and India saying 'we are killing minorities for the glory of separation of religion and state', your baseless opinion is just that- baseless. You obviously have no idea what secularism is, again. And Israel and India are examples of ethnonationalist and Hindu nationalist extremism respectively. Not secularism. You are deluded.

You have trouble reading simple points. Secuarlists can be extremists too as we can see with the nation of France, which is using its secular ideology to attack religions, mainly Islam. OF course you're an athiest and in your little world , only people of religion can be extreme. You are clueless and deluded.
 
You have trouble reading simple points. Secuarlists can be extremists too as we can see with the nation of France, which is using its secular ideology to attack religions, mainly Islam. OF course you're an athiest and in your little world , only people of religion can be extreme. You are clueless and deluded.

You must be cognitively impaired. Secular 'ideology' would be that of separation of religion and state. If someone, a secularist, killed some people because they were religious, it wouldn't be 'secular terrorism'. It would be anti-religious terrorism, or a hate crime, whatever you want to call it, but it wouldn't be due to secularism. Again, you don't know what secularism is, it is simply just the separation of religion and state. You just desperately want to label it as extreme because you're a fundamentalist.

France doesn't 'especially attack' Islam. Get that victim mentality out of here. The cartoons would never have been projected onto government buildings if that terrorist didn't behead that innocent teacher (who you put in the same category as the terrorist, you called them 'both idiots', says a lot, doesn't it?), and that teacher wouldn't have even showed the cartoons in class if Charlie Hebdo weren't attacked (with many members killed) by terrorists because of them. Do France go too far with the anti-religion stuff? Yes, perhaps they do, but you are still free to go to church/mosque/synagogue/gurdwara/mandir/anything else. You are free to join any religion and leave any religion. There is no archaic apostasy and blasphemy law. It is objectively better than and more free than any theocracy (Islamic or otherwise), but you won't accept that.
 
You must be cognitively impaired. Secular 'ideology' would be that of separation of religion and state. If someone, a secularist, killed some people because they were religious, it wouldn't be 'secular terrorism'. It would be anti-religious terrorism, or a hate crime, whatever you want to call it, but it wouldn't be due to secularism. Again, you don't know what secularism is, it is simply just the separation of religion and state. You just desperately want to label it as extreme because you're a fundamentalist.

France doesn't 'especially attack' Islam. Get that victim mentality out of here. The cartoons would never have been projected onto government buildings if that terrorist didn't behead that innocent teacher (who you put in the same category as the terrorist, you called them 'both idiots', says a lot, doesn't it?), and that teacher wouldn't have even showed the cartoons in class if Charlie Hebdo weren't attacked (with many members killed) by terrorists because of them. Do France go too far with the anti-religion stuff? Yes, perhaps they do, but you are still free to go to church/mosque/synagogue/gurdwara/mandir/anything else. You are free to join any religion and leave any religion. There is no archaic apostasy and blasphemy law. It is objectively better than and more free than any theocracy (Islamic or otherwise), but you won't accept that.

lol. You are slow. Secularism is a seperation of religion from state but those who hold dear to this ideology also believe they are allowed to insult religions such as Charlie Hebdo and other extremists like Macron who thinks its right to spread hate or incite hate by projecting photos of holy figures on buildings. This is no less an extremist mindset than those of extremist religious people. In your little world athiests, those who support secularism cannot be extreme. But you yourself a a good example of this, broke laws in Mecca and lied to your own parents.
 
While I agree that they may be a bit too anti-religion, you are still free to practice your religion in almost every case. That is not the case under many Islamic countries if you are a minority. Your religious rights as a Muslim in France are far more than your religious rights as a minority religion in most Muslim countries.

Also, let's not act like cartoons are anything close to apostasy and blasphemy laws.

Yes, but lets not confuse the issue here: You are comparing an Islamic republic to an enlightened Secular one. When you use the term Islamic, you know its not under any pretensions of being a secular country with secular laws. There will be certain liberties afforded to minorities but there will be penalties for blasphemy and whatnot (I am not condoning the draconian blasphemy laws, by the way but thats the topic of another discussion).. Point is France claims to be secular where all religious liberties "should be" protected but they are not. Overall they do look at religiousness with a crooked view. This goes for all of them not just Islam.

Why is a veil a bad thing? why are they so adamant that this is a symbol of suppression of women, if women themselves want to exercise their right to cover their face?
 
lol. You are slow. Secularism is a seperation of religion from state but those who hold dear to this ideology also believe they are allowed to insult religions such as Charlie Hebdo and other extremists like Macron who thinks its right to spread hate or incite hate by projecting photos of holy figures on buildings. This is no less an extremist mindset than those of extremist religious people. In your little world athiests, those who support secularism cannot be extreme. But you yourself a a good example of this, broke laws in Mecca and lied to your own parents.

As someone said, a brick wall. Again, there isn't room for extremism in the aspect of religion and state being separate. Macron's actions weren't extremist. They were provocative, sure, but it wasn't extremist. If he declared Muslims an enemy of the state that would be extremist, yes. State atheism can be extremist (look at the Soviet Union). Perhaps you could consider the religious symbols in school extremism (I see it more as a restriction on religious freedom, but then if you think this specific example is extremism, then you'd have to accent that Islamic countries with blasphemy and apostasy laws are extremist, which you won't), but that isn't related to secularism. That is anti-religion sentiment, which certainly can be extremist (case in point, the Soviet Union). There can be anti-religious extremism, I never doubted that, I just pointed out your erroneous statement of 'secular extremism'. If you change that to 'anti-religion' extremism, then of course I'd agree that's possible, you've just been spouting this nonsense for months, I'm surprised you can still read the screen behind those tears you've had in your eyes since the projection of those cartoons.

You seem to think me 'lying to my parents' is worse than them disowning me for being an atheist, interesting that. You also think the projection of the images in France are worse than the terrorist who beheaded Mr Paty, also very interesting. And again, mocking religious figures isn't extremism.
 
Yes, but lets not confuse the issue here: You are comparing an Islamic republic to an enlightened Secular one. When you use the term Islamic, you know its not under any pretensions of being a secular country with secular laws. There will be certain liberties afforded to minorities but there will be penalties for blasphemy and whatnot (I am not condoning the draconian blasphemy laws, by the way but thats the topic of another discussion).. Point is France claims to be secular where all religious liberties "should be" protected but they are not. Overall they do look at religiousness with a crooked view. This goes for all of them not just Islam.

Why is a veil a bad thing? why are they so adamant that this is a symbol of suppression of women, if women themselves want to exercise their right to cover their face?

I never justified the religious symbol ban, I even said it's likely does more bad than good. I understand that the intention is to stop the forcing of religion from parents onto children, but it takes that option out of their hands completely, which isn't fair. I don't support niqab bans (but it is inappropriate in certain places, so the wearer should be aware they may need to take it off). But you have to agree that France grants far more religious freedom than Islamic countries, that should not be contentious at all.
 
I never justified the religious symbol ban, I even said it's likely does more bad than good. I understand that the intention is to stop the forcing of religion from parents onto children, but it takes that option out of their hands completely, which isn't fair. I don't support niqab bans (but it is inappropriate in certain places, so the wearer should be aware they may need to take it off). But you have to agree that France grants far more religious freedom than Islamic countries, that should not be contentious at all.

That I do. Most western nations do. No question about it. The western mode of governance and schools of thought are far more flexible and all encompassing than others. But France lately has been on a bender to vilify Muslims, that’s all.
 
That I do. Most western nations do. No question about it. The western mode of governance and schools of thought are far more flexible and all encompassing than others. But France lately has been on a bender to vilify Muslims, that’s all.

Examples of this vilification? If you're talking about the image projections, they projected cartoons mocking Christianity and Judaism too. That aside, and obviously the religious symbol ban which affects Sikhs males just as much as Muslim females in school, I'm not sure if there's a unique policy which affects Muslims? There was that bad case where they were suspecting extremism of a practicing Muslim family, but that seemed like a one-off rather than a systemic thing.
 

School principal resigns after receiving death threats in hijab row​


French politicians from across the spectrum Wednesday expressed dismay over the resignation of a Paris school principal who had received death threats after asking a student to remove her Muslim veil on the premises.

In a show of support, Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, a former education minister, was set to receive the principal later Wednesday, his office said.

Secularism and religion are hot-button issues in France, which is home to Europe's largest Muslim community.

In 2004, authorities banned school children from wearing "signs or outfits by which students ostensibly show a religious affiliation" such as headscarves, turbans or kippas on the basis of the country's secular laws which are meant to guarantee neutrality in state institutions.

The headmaster's departure comes amid deep tensions in the country following a series of incidents including the killing of a teacher by an Islamist former pupil last year.

The headmaster at the Maurice-Ravel lycee in eastern Paris quit after receiving death threats online following an altercation with a student last month, officials told French news agency AFP on Tuesday.

In late February, he had asked three students to remove their Islamic headscarves on school premises, but one of them refused and an altercation ensued, according to prosecutors. He later received death threats online.

According to a school letter sent to teachers, pupils and parents on Tuesday, the principal stood down for "security reasons", while education officials said he had taken "early retirement".

 
Last edited:

France plans mobile school force after headteacher resigns over death threats​


France is setting up a mobile security force for schools "experiencing difficulties", days after the headteacher of a Paris school resigned because of death threats.

The head was falsely accused of striking a student in a row over her wearing anIslamic headscarf in school.

Education Minister Nicole Belloubet said the mobile force wasintended to reassure teachers and boost security.

Tensions in French schools are high since the killing of two teachers.

Samuel Paty was decapitated on the street in a Paris suburb in 2020 and Dominique Bernard was killed at his school in Arras five months ago. Former students who had been radicalised were involved in both killings.

"Teachers are not alone and we are all forming a shield around them, around our schools," Ms Belloubet told reporters during a visit on Friday to asecondary school in Bordeaux.

The education ministry said the "mobile school force" would be composed of about 20education officers who could be deployed within 48 hours from the start of the next school year, wherever local authorities needed additional support.

The team's mission would be to provide security in a school in "acute crisis", with the aim of providing internal security, reassurance and education skills.

In late February, the headteacher of the Maurice Ravel Lycée in Paris insisted his student remove her Islamic head-covering, in accordance with French law.

The student claimed the head had struck her during a heated exchange, but police found no evidence to support her claims.

However, after numerous death threats posted on social media, the headteacher announced his resignation this week, saying it was "out of concern for my own safety and that of the school".

Police have been patrolling around the school, and two people were detained in connection with the death threats. Police say they are not linked to the school.

Politicians on both the left and right have expressed outrage over the headteacher's situation and Prime Minister Gabriel Attal announced on Thursday the student would be sued by the state for making the false accusation.

MPs and local officials took part in a rally outside the school on Friday morning in support of the headteacher and to demand that secular rules remain enforced in French schools.

Nicole Belloubet has suspended France's ENT digital messaging system, used by teachers and students, because of a proliferation of threats.

Education officials have reported more than 320 threats made across France since the middle of last week which the minister blamed on students' personal accounts being hacked. In Paris alone about 50 schools had received bomb threats through the messaging system.

The ENT system enables students to access various educational resources online and Ms Belloubet said she hoped it would be up and running again next month after the spring break.

Several arrests have been made in connection with the online threats, including a 17-year-old and a man aged 21.

 
Trial begins over beheading of teacher who showed Prophet Muhammed cartoon

Eight people have gone on trial in Paris accused of encouraging the killer of Samuel Paty, the teacher who was beheaded on the street outside his school four years ago.

Abdoullakh Anzorov, the young man of Chechen origin who wielded the knife, is dead – shot by police in the minutes after his attack.

So the trial is less about the murder itself, and more about the circumstances that led to it.

Over seven weeks, the court will hear how a 13-year-old’s schoolgirl lie span out of control thanks to social media, triggering an international hate campaign, and inspiring a lone mission of vengeance from a self-styled defender of Islam.

On trial are two men accused of identifying Mr Paty as a “blasphemer” over the Internet, two friends of Anzorov who allegedly gave him logistical help, and four others who offered support on chatlines.

Mr Paty’s murder horrified – and petrified – France.

He was a conscientious and much-liked history teacher in a secondary school in Conflans-Sainte-Honorine, in the prosperous western suburbs of Paris.

On 6 October 2020 he gave a lesson on freedom of speech – the same lesson he had given several times before – to a class of young teenagers.

Drawing on the tragically famous episode of Charlie Hebdo magazine – how publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad had led to the 2015 murder of most of its staff – he briefly showed an example of the cartoons.

Before doing so he recommended that those who feared being offended avert their eyes.

The next day one of his pupils – the 13-year-old girl – was asked by her father why she was not going to school.

She told him she had been disciplined because she dared to stand up to Mr Paty when he told Muslims to leave the class so he could show a naked picture of the prophet.

It was a triple lie.

Mr Paty had not told Muslims to leave the class. The girl had been disciplined, but not for the reason she said. She had not even been in the room on the day Mr Paty gave the lesson on freedom of speech.

But with the Internet to send it on its way, the lie spread... and spread.

First the girl’s father – Brahim Chnina - made her repeat the claim on videos, which he posted on Facebook, naming the teacher.

Then, a local Islamist - Abdelhakim Sefrioui - created a 10-minute online video entitled “Islam and the prophet insulted in a public college.”

Within a couple of days the school was inundated with threats and messages of hate from around the world. Paty told colleagues that he was living through a difficult time because of the campaign against him.

Meanwhile, the denunciation had reached the attention of an 18-year-old Chechen refugee living in Rouen, 80km (50 miles) to the west.

Anzorov made an initial note on his telephone that read: “A teacher has shown his class a picture of the messenger of Allah naked.”

Anzorov then sought the help of two friends, who are now on trial.

One of them was allegedly present when he bought a knife in a Rouen shop. The other helped him buy two replica pistols on 16 October, the day of the attack, and then drove him to the school.

The four last defendants - including one woman - are people with whom Anzorov conversed on Snapchat and Twitter and who allegedly offered him encouragement.

The defendants admit their connection to the case, but they contest the charges of "terrorist association" or "complicity to commit terrorist murder".

Lawyers for the girl’s father and the Islamist preacher will argue that though they publicly condemned Mr Paty, they never called for his murder.

In a similar vein, lawyers for Anzorov’s friends – actual and online – will say they had no notion he planned a killing.

For the prosecution, context is key. Samuel Paty’s murder took place at a time of heightened awareness of the jihadist threat. In October 2020, Charlie Hebdo had just re-published some of the cartoons, to mark the start of a trial resulting from the original attack.

The internet was full of new Islamist threats against France, and in late September a Pakistani man had wounded two people with a machete at Charlie Hebdo’s former offices.

In that climate, publicly denouncing a man for blasphemy was tantamount to designating a terrorist target, prosecutors will argue.

A year ago the girl at the heart of the case was convicted in a minors’ court of making false accusations and given a suspended prison term.

Five other pupils were also convicted of identifying Mr Paty for Anzarov in return for money.

The trial is set to run until late December.

BBC
 
You ask me specially, any particular reason?
Any loss of human life is sad and murder is condemnable act.
Not sure why there has to be “takes” on such issues.
Wondering whats your take on the blaming the victim and linking the murder to holocaust denial and thereby freedom of speech is meaning less arguments

The trend of equating losing one's job over criticism of jews to getting beheaded over a cartoon seems to a fsahinalbel among pak islamists.
 
Wondering whats your take on the blaming the victim and linking the murder to holocaust denial and thereby freedom of speech is meaning less arguments

The trend of equating losing one's job over criticism of jews to getting beheaded over a cartoon seems to a fsahinalbel among pak islamists.
Do I ever single you out specifically asking for your opinion on what I believe or allege to be Indian Hindu Right Wing Hindutva trends?
 
Do I ever single you out specifically asking for your opinion on what I believe or allege to be Indian Hindu Right Wing Hindutva trends?
or are we calling them Atheistic trends now? I am not sure. Its all very confusing when it comes to you guys at times.
 
Back
Top