Multiple shootings in Paris

RedRobin said:
The aspect of all this which doesn't sit comfortably with me is that a society which vigorously promotes political correctness to a ridiculous nth degree also allows the mockery of religious beliefs. It shouldn't matter what those beliefs are nor whether you agree with their practices or not. The word 'hypocrisy' comes to mind. Those cartoonists were poking a stick in a hornets nest - What else did they expect to happen?
Click to expand...
You do understand that a society is made up of lots of different people with lots of different opinions? A society can't be hypocritical; only individuals (or arguably institutions) can. Some people in society hold "politically correct" views; others are free to disagree with them.

Free speech means that you are free to hold and express any views you want as long as you don't harass* people or directly incite crimes, and others are free to disagree with you. It doesn't mean people have to listen to or respect what you say. We have to be free to mock ideas (including religion) otherwise we're saying that some people have a special privilege to dictate "truth" without facing counterargument. The religious are free to ignore or argue against that mockery.

When you resort to violence in a dispute of ideas, all it shows is that you've lost the argument. You no longer have confidence in your ability to defend your ideas intellectually. In many ways, the attack on Charlie Hebdo shows how flimsy the attackers beliefs are; whether they realise it or not. "I can no longer rationally defend my belief that images of the prophet are offensive so I'm just going to attack people who disagree." The same goes for people who demand special legal protections for their beliefs.

*If the cartoonists were printing off offensive pictures and posting them through muslims' doors, or going into mosques with cartoons on placards, that would be harrassment. As it was, they published in a magazine which people are entirely free to ignore if it upsets them.
 
Last edited:
andyscott said:
Offence is taken not given :)

You dont want to be offended, then dont.

Its your "choice" to be offended.
Click to expand...
I don't know if you can say it's a choice to be offended. Offense is complex.
What is true is that you don't have to pay attention to things that offend or upset you.
 
ghoti said:
I don't know if you can say it's a choice to be offended. Offense is complex.
Click to expand...
ghoti said:
What is true is that you don't have to pay attention to things that offend or upset you.
Click to expand...

....If only more people behaved like that, there wouldn't be the problems and the events being discussed in this thread.
 
ghoti said:
I don't know if you can say it's a choice to be offended. Offense is complex.
What is true is that you don't have to pay attention to things that offend or upset you.
Click to expand...

Excellent way of putting it.
 
Live on tv ;)
 
Last edited:
Latest reports say a possible hostage situation with an ongoing car chase after shots being fired.
 
ST4 said:
Time we printed more of these cartoons...

Time we invested/recruited indigenous born Muslims of eastern descent to infiltrate these terror cells and make them leak info
Click to expand...

How can you be sure we don't already? infiltrating any network of criminal activity is an age old tactic for gathering information.
 
Yv said:
How can you be sure we don't already? infiltrating any network of criminal activity is an age old tactic for gathering information.
Click to expand...
Because there isn't a BBC link to all the identities :D
 
Sounds like they've got the scumbags pinnned down although there are unconfirmed reports there may be hostages involved
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
RedRobin said:
The aspect of all this which doesn't sit comfortably with me is that a society which vigorously promotes political correctness to a ridiculous nth degree also allows the mockery of religious beliefs. It shouldn't matter what those beliefs are nor whether you agree with their practices or not. The word 'hypocrisy' comes to mind. Those cartoonists were poking a stick in a hornets nest - What else did they expect to happen?

I am very anti ISIS and am quite happy to accept that there would be collateral damage (the loss of innocent lives) in violently taking them out and that's what needs to happen.

Perhaps now that this murderous event has happened it will spur some military action. We are well past any chance of diplomacy. Unfortunately all these matters of international politics are actually very complex.
Click to expand...

SO you are OK with civilians being killed as 'collateral damage' but think that cartoons of Mohamed are not on?
 
Double post
 
Last edited:
Unconfirmed reports that two more people have died.
 
1 more person killed plus some wounded. Looking like the criminals are coralled.
 
I hear that they said they may not negotiate with them,question is are they better off by just taking them out or more useful alive?
 
Apparently they are now hiked up with at least one hostage.....reports of injured people and some possible deaths.....according to bbc radio
 
dejongj said:
I agree, I was disgusted by many of the conversations in the UK where they shied away from it not wanting to upset their readership. Sure I understand a company needs to make money and you don't want to drive away those that spend it with you.
Click to expand...

its like the whole Sony hack thing and the way Sony initially bowed to the threats. they should never have delayed or thought about scrapping the film (no matter how crap it sounds).
 
I hear that they said they may not negotiate with them,question is are they better off by just taking them out or more useful alive
Click to expand...

Negotiation only works if the suspects want to talk, or have something to bargain with. In this case, lives for freedom isn't an option, they must realise that.

The end result is I'm afraid not going to be pretty. If they can be taken alive then great that will always be the preference as it gets intelligence, but it's unlikely to happen.
 
Le Figaro newspaper says that negotiations are under way with the two kidnappers but this remains unconfirmed.
 
I agree and that is where I have so much respect for those boys and girls doing those jobs. The hard decisions need to be made and as can be seen on these kind of threats not many can actually do that. Unfortunately it is reality, and if only people realised how many intelligence or interception alerts are issued every single day. The problem is huge and very real.
 
Bernie174 said:
Gosh, you are clever! Why haven't MI5 thought of that?????? Such a shame they didn't think of that with the IRA too...?
Click to expand...

I suspect, Bernie, you know that MI5 had a lot of success infiltrating the IRA and at very senior levels (no secrets there - it is in their written history now)
 
Bernie174 said:
Negotiation only works if the suspects want to talk, or have something to bargain with. In this case, lives for freedom isn't an option, they must realise that.

The end result is I'm afraid not going to be pretty. If they can be taken alive then great that will always be the preference as it gets intelligence, but it's unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...


Well Mi5 already knew about these two nutters, they did not do much acting on that information did they.
 
Confirmed hostage negotiations, reports of further killings denied by French Interior Minister.
 
u8myufo said:
Well Mi5 already knew about these two nutters, they did not do much acting on that information did they.
Click to expand...

It's that fine line again though..... plough in there and arrest them because you think they're terrorists and there'll be cries of victimisation/racism etc and the good guys suddenly become the bad guys.

However I don't know what the answer is. Knowing someone is involved with suspected terrorist activity is one thing but they're hardly likely to make the whys and wherefores known to a wider audience.
 
I suspect, Bernie, you know that MI5 had a lot of success infiltrating the IRA and at very senior levels (no secrets there - it is in their written history now)
Click to expand...

Yes, I am fully aware of what MI5 did with the IRA, and other groups in NI. I was aiming some sarcasm at Steve's silly comment, suggesting that someone infiltrates these Islamic groups.
 
Well Mi5 already knew about these two nutters, they did not do much acting on that information did they.
Click to expand...

Ah, now this is the problem with all crime, not just terrorism.

I knew for example who was committing burglaries on my ground when I was a Policeman. We all did. Yes, we made life difficult, stopped and searched regularly, but knowing and proving they have done something? 2 different things. We also had other things to do, so we couldn't keep tabs on them full time.

With terrorism, its even more difficult. You may know who they are, you may know they are up to something, but you still need to prove it. The option of making life difficult, in the same was we did with billy the burglar has to be offset against letting them get as far as doing something you can arrest and prosecute for.

You also have to keep in mind that around 1000 suspected terrorists if its an accurate number, and only 5000 or so people in the Security Service? Keeping absolute tabs on all doesn't work, even if Islamic terrorism is the only thing you do. That 5000 includes HR, IT, Canteen Staff, vehicle fitters and all the other things you need in any organisation, so its actually more like 1000 operational people, and in MI5's case, that means somewhere around 500 surveillance officers. Thats to cover Irish terrorist groups (yes, they are still there!), the Eastern European espionage, drugs and serious crime.

So knowing that, you need to ask if your point is a valid criticism?
 
Bernie wrote, inter alia:-

"With terrorism, its even more difficult. You may know who they are, you may know they are up to something, but you still need to prove it. The option of making life difficult, in the same was we did with billy the burglar has to be offset against letting them get as far as doing something you can arrest and prosecute for."

Yes, and to that add the complication that in apprehending and/or prosecuting may bring the risk of revealing the existence/extent of infiltration and methods. Cannot be straightforward.
 
Correct!

There's also the fact that some evidence is not admissable as evidence, which means that you arrest, but can't prosecute. But in arresting, you've told them you are onto them, which means you loose that lead on the organisation.
 
Last edited:
Going by the updates on the BBC News site, the French aren't messing about! Hopefully it'll be brought to a conclusion ASAP.
 
Not straightforward, not cheap, not thankful either way.

What I do like is that Paris already announce Charlie as an honourable citizen. Yet here in London the council is finding so many excuses not to do anything to avoid offending Muslims regarding honouring Lee Rigby if I'm to believe the news story on LBC. Absolutely disgraceful by the continual apologists in this country.
 
dejongj said:
Not straightforward, not cheap, not thankful either way.

What I do like is that Paris already announce Charlie as an honourable citizen. Yet here in London the council is finding so many excuses not to do anything to avoid offending Muslims regarding honouring Lee Rigby if I'm to believe the news story on LBC. Absolutely disgraceful by the continual apologists in this country.
Click to expand...

Yes, that has been festering for a while. Yellowbacks !
 
Rapscallion said:
SO you are OK with civilians being killed as 'collateral damage' but think that cartoons of Mohamed are not on?
Click to expand...

....You are over simplifying what I said.

I think it very unfortunate when civilians are killed as 'collateral damage' and if possible it needs to be avoided. However, for the greater good of all, this is not always possible - As the historical events of major wars have demonstrated and will continue to do. There will always be human conflicts and hence wars even if it's over something as basic as food resources, let alone idealogies.

If satirical publishers had less of a leftwing political agenda and more respect for others, there would be less cause for others to so violently react. But of course, such fanatics as ISIS will doubtless use any excuse and they have to be stopped by any means possible and not encouraged by cartoons.
 
Last edited:
BBC:

"In a separate development, French media reports say police have now identified the suspected killer of a policewoman in the Paris suburb of Montrouge on Thursday. The shooting is said to be unrelated to the Charlie Hebdo attack."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top