Canadian mosque shooting, labeled as an act of terrorism

[Nah]

Six people were killed and eight wounded when gunmen opened fire at a Quebec City mosque during Sunday night prayers, in what Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called a "terrorist attack on Muslims".

....

The shooting came on the weekend that Trudeau said Canada would welcome refugees, after U.S. President Donald Trump suspended the U.S. refugee program and temporarily barred citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States on national security grounds.

A Canadian federal Liberal legislator, Greg Fergus, tweeted: "This is an act of terrorism -- the result of years of sermonizing Muslims. Words matter and hateful speeches have consequences!"

full article

It sort of grabbed my attention that people are calling an attack on Muslim people an act of terrorism (I'm not saying it isn't btw, I do think that this can be called an act of terrorism), it's just I can't remember the last time I heard someone say that.

or maybe it's just that I live in the US and the rest of the world is normal

 

[Corrin]

No, it's the first time I heard it but it is true, any other way they'd call it a terrorist attack so.
I'm ashamed really, I thought Canada was better than this.

 

[Arsenic]

I don't think anywhere is better sadly. I think our lovely Furher is certainly having an influence on other territories, especially those as close to the US as Quebec.

Also looks like one of the guys names who did it was accidentally outed by a local news report "Mohamed Khadir from Morocco"
Here comes all the "Muslim Civil war comes to Canada" comments!

 

[Esper]

Not to take away from the tragedy here, but there was also a mosque burnt to the ground in Texas a few days ago. Anyone with a working brain should be able to see these attacks on Muslims and realize that not all Muslims are terrorists. I can only hope it will create some more empathy, which is sorely lacking around the world.

 

[Aeroblast]

Another tragic turn of events, nobody should be killed for their religious beliefs (actually nobody should be killed like this full stop, but you get the point)

 

[Mareep123]

full article

It sort of grabbed my attention that people are calling an attack on Muslim people an act of terrorism (I'm not saying it isn't btw, I do think that this can be called an act of terrorism), it's just I can't remember the last time I heard someone say that.

or maybe it's just that I live in the US and the rest of the world is normal

It's most definitely an act of terror. Terrorism is not about race, it's a group of people who insight terror for a political agenda

 

[Hermione Granger]

Any attack to religion groups I would classify as terrorism.

 

[gimmepie]

I'm really not surprised by this. All the anti-Islam rhetoric (which is all completely baseless) that's been going around, these sorts of things were bound to happen. I'm pleased that the Canadian government is responding appropriately and has been quick to point out why this sort of thing happened in the first place.

 

[Aeroblast]

I'm really not surprised by this. All the anti-Islam rhetoric (which is all completely baseless) that's been going around, these sorts of things were bound to happen. I'm pleased that the Canadian government is responding appropriately and has been quick to point out why this sort of thing happened in the first place.

Not to go off-topic, but do you think criticizing Islam is "anti-Islam rhetoric" as you put it?

 

[gimmepie]

Not to go off-topic, but do you think criticizing Islam is anti-Islam rhetoric?

I think that there's a big difference between criticising and demonising. Islam has been subject to both, but mostly it has been subject to the latter and it's the latter that is not okay.

 

[Aeroblast]

I think that there's a big difference between criticising and demonising. Islam has been subject to both, but mostly it has been subject to the latter and it's the latter that is not okay.

What do you think is the big difference between criticizing and demonizing?

I believe that Islam is a backwards religion that retards social progress, would you consider that criticizing or demonizing?

EDIT - I'll probably make a new thread if this conversation gets extended.

 

[gimmepie]

What do you think is the big difference between criticizing and demonizing?

I believe that Islam is a backwards religion that retards social progress, would you consider that criticizing or demonizing?

EDIT - I'll probably make a new thread if this conversation gets extended.

To criticise is to point out reasoned flaws, preferably without bias. To demonise is to present something negatively, often whilst ignoring any positives.

I'd point out that Islam is nearly identical to Christianity and Judaism first. Why is is this specifically true of Islam in your book? Personally, I'd say your responses to those questions would determine which it is.

 

[Aeroblast]

To criticise is to point out reasoned flaws, preferably without bias. To demonise is to present something negatively, often whilst ignoring any positives.

I'd point out that Islam is nearly identical to Christianity and Judaism first. Why is is this specifically true of Islam in your book? Personally, I'd say your responses to those questions would determine which it is.

Before I get into any details, I would like to be crystal clear again that I condemn terrorist attacks of any form against anybody, be it Christians, Atheists, or Muslims, for any reason - including this attack of course.

Now to your point, I would agree that at its core, there are similarities between the three religions. I would say the biggest difference between Christianity/Judaism and Islam is that the former has gone through reformation to marginalize the bad parts of their holy book to fit modern secular values, while latter hasn't done so. Which is why you hear of lots of honor killings, throwing gays off buildings, killing anyone who leaves/blasphemes Islam in the Islamic world, and not practiced by anybody who's a Christian or a Jew - if there are counterexamples, it should be extremely marginal in comparison as far as I'm aware. I doubt, for example, there was anyone who performed honor killing in the Western world by a Christian/Jew citing Leviticus (terrible book, by the way) or any other outdated book in the OT in the 21st century while there are dozens of instances in countries like Pakistan.

Also, let's take a look at the prophets of Christianity and Islam, respectively Jesus and Muhammad. As far as I can gather from their respective texts, Jesus has never encouraged violence (Muhammad did), never tortured anybody (Muhammad did), never killed anybody (Muhammad did), never had sex with children (Muhammad did), never launched military campaigns (Muhammad did)... list goes on, I'd gladly continue until I run out of examples I can think of. When you look at the actions of these two prophets, it's not too surprising to see some of its followers behave accordingly, even today.

So what can be done to solve the many flaws in Islam? Obviously the solution to this issue is more complicated than it first appears but one popular proposal is reformation - I think it's important to give people like Majid Nawaz (pretty sure he's still a Muslim, just deradicalized), who has different opinion on Islam, a voice instead of demonizing them as "anti-muslim infidel". Islam as we know it may be completely transformed should this "reformation" succeed, but it's infinite times better than this radical BS that doesn't, and will most likely never conform to modern society. One thing I know is that labeling those who criticize Islam as "islamophobes" is going to help no one. (I know you haven't done it but it's such a common ad hominem that I have to address this)

tl;dr - Islam is worse than Judaism and Christianity, even if there are some similarities.

 

[Hands]

Before I get into any details, I would like to be crystal clear again that I condemn terrorist attacks of any form against anybody, be it Christians, Atheists, or Muslims, for any reason - including this attack of course.

Now to your point, I would agree that at its core, there are similarities between the three religions. I would say the biggest difference between Christianity/Judaism and Islam is that the former has gone through reformation to marginalize the bad parts of their holy book to fit modern secular values, while latter hasn't done so. Which is why you hear of lots of honor killings, throwing gays off buildings, killing anyone who leaves/blasphemes Islam in the Islamic world, and not practiced by anybody who's a Christian or a Jew - if there are counterexamples, it should be extremely marginal in comparison as far as I'm aware. I doubt, for example, there was anyone who performed honor killing in the Western world by a Christian/Jew citing Leviticus (terrible book, by the way) or any other outdated book in the OT in the 21st century while there are dozens of instances in countries like Pakistan.

Also, let's take a look at the prophets of Christianity and Islam, respectively Jesus and Muhammad. As far as I can gather from their respective texts, Jesus has never encouraged violence (Muhammad did), never tortured anybody (Muhammad did), never killed anybody (Muhammad did), never had sex with children (Muhammad did), never launched military campaigns (Muhammad did)... list goes on, I'd gladly continue until I run out of examples I can think of. When you look at the actions of these two prophets, it's not too surprising to see some of its followers behave accordingly, even today.

So what can be done to solve the many flaws in Islam? Obviously the solution to this issue is more complicated than it first appears but one popular proposal is reformation - I think it's important to give people like Majid Nawaz (pretty sure he's still a Muslim, just deradicalized), who has different opinion on Islam, a voice instead of demonizing them as "anti-muslim infidel". Islam as we know it may be completely transformed should this "reformation" succeed, but it's infinite times better than this radical BS that doesn't, and will most likely never conform to modern society. One thing I know is that labeling those who criticize Islam as "islamophobes" is going to help no one. (I know you haven't done it but it's such a common ad hominem that I have to address this)

tl;dr - Islam is worse than Judaism and Christianity, even if there are some similarities.

Whilst this really is a broad topic and a controversial one, I feel it's hugely important you actually read both the Bible and the Quaran before continuing this because clearly you don't seem to know much about Jesus in either religion as he's not only the key prophet of Christianity, but the third most important figure in the Islamic world too (Muslims believe in large swathes of the Old/New Testaments, their main discrepancy is they believe Jesus wasn't the Son of God but was, like Mohammed, a holy prophet sent by God.)

Jesus also did condone violence, for instance, during the cleansing of the Temple, Jesus is recorded to have physically bound a whip which he took to the traders and taxmen who had turned the Temple into a market. Jesus does very little to outright condemn violence. Turning the other cheek, which is famously removed from context every time a Christian wants to highlight how nice and friendly their religion is, specifically refers to avoiding escalation over a minor insult.

 

[Aeroblast]

Whilst this really is a broad topic and a controversial one, I feel it's hugely important you actually read both the Bible and the Quran before continuing this because clearly you don't seem to know much about Jesus in either religion as he's not only the key prophet of Christianity, but the third most important figure in the Islamic world too (Muslims believe in large swathes of the Old/New Testaments, their main discrepancy is they believe Jesus wasn't the Son of God but was, like Mohammed, a holy prophet sent by God.)

Jesus also did condone violence, for instance, during the cleansing of the Temple, Jesus is recorded to have physically bound a whip which he took to the traders and taxmen who had turned the Temple into a market. Jesus does very little to outright condemn violence. Turning the other cheek, which is famously removed from context every time a Christian wants to highlight how nice and friendly their religion is, specifically refers to avoiding escalation over a minor insult.

Regarding bolded, let me preface by saying I'm irreligious (more specifically agnostic atheist) - I don't have a high regard for Christianity, though if it comes down to defending Christianity or Islam (which has been the case more often than not in recent years) I would take the former 100 times out of 100. This isn't purely down to the fundamentals of both religions, but also their influence and application in the modern world.

Anyways, I know Jesus is an important prophet of Islam, but it's hard to argue against that Muhammad is far more influential in Islam than Jesus.

Anywhere in the Bible that says Jesus incited violence? As far as I know there aren't any instances, though I wouldn't be surprised if I skipped over few details as the Bible is contradictory as is. If you're talking about Islamic Jesus I'll grant I don't know much, but it's not really that relevant as none of the Christians follow Quran's interpretation of the Jesus, which is where I'm presuming you got your information from. And even if I decided to be generous and concede the part about condoning violence, you still have to answer for many other awful things Muhammad (in the Qu'ran and Hadith) did that Jesus (in the Bible) didn't.

And I'm still waiting to hear when was the last time a Christian murdered his/her daughter because she got raped. Or when a man got away with raping a woman because not enough male witnesses showed up (outside of Islamic world). etc.

We can go on about comparing Christianity and Islam is all day, but no matter how violent Christianity was in the past, it doesn't absolve Islam of any blame regards to its incompatibility with civilized world in the 21st century. If anything, it shows that Islam, too, can undergo reformation to integrate to modern society (Islam clearly hasn't been reformed yet if you look at countries like Saudi Arabia), and until that happens, nonsensical platitude of "Islam is a religion of peace" and "anyone who criticizes Islam is a islamophobe" has to stop.

 

[Esper]

~*~

I don't know how much I should go into this because I don't want to get too off topic.

There is the Lord's Resistance Army (remember Kony?) which is a Christian army/militia/terrorist group. They've killed a lot of people in addition to being responsible to countless other crimes against humanity. There's the well known Ku Klux Klan. I don't think I need to go into details there. There are the abortion clinic bombers and shooters. There's The Troubles from North Ireland. I could go on, but you get the idea. There are still violent Christians out there, or if you'd rather "Christian-inspired violence," and they are contemporary examples.

In India there are numerous cases of women being attacked and the attackers going unpunished. Not a Christian example, but not a Muslim one either. Similar things can and do happen all over the world where there isn't a strong enough rule or law or respect for women. There are many countries in the world today where marital rape isn't a crime, and they are not all Muslim countries. Even in the United States and other western countries it wasn't a crime within people's lifetime.

But instead of more examples I'd like to posit the idea that violence isn't specifically due to religion, but to lack of effective and impartial governments and/or law enforcement. In other words, if you're in a country where you can't rely on the police to come to your aid then you're probably more likely to be a victim of an attack by the criminals who feel they can act with impunity. I'm not saying that this is the only factor, and I'm not trying to absolve any religious group from any complacency or complicity on their part. I'm saying that without an effective government, such as in a war-torn country, it is much easier for extremists to fill the void left by police/government who don't have the means to protect people and/or enforce laws.

 

[Alex]

It's definitely an act of terror, and make no mistake: the culprit is a born and raised Quebec citizen. This was white on Muslim terror. Horrible tragedy that was no doubt strengthened with the election of a racist, prejudice, white supremist enabler like Trump. I feel deeply saddened for the families of the victims. Locals in the area recounted happy and heart-warming memories of those killed.

 

[User19sq]

See, racist, paranoid American peoples who voted for Trump? In case Roof didn't nail in the final coffin yet: non-Muslims are capable of terrorism too.

And nobody should blame the poor Muslims for being the victim. Blame the shooter. Hate the sinner, but not the victim. This is why Trudeou welcomes Muslims, to keep hateful ideology like this from causing pain. Sadly, the irony shines brightly. Another holy war, I suppose.

Wake me the f*ck up when those kinds of war stop, please.

 

[Aeroblast]

I don't know how much I should go into this because I don't want to get too off topic.

There is the Lord's Resistance Army (remember Kony?) which is a Christian army/militia/terrorist group. They've killed a lot of people in addition to being responsible to countless other crimes against humanity. There's the well known Ku Klux Klan. I don't think I need to go into details there. There are the abortion clinic bombers and shooters. There's The Troubles from North Ireland. I could go on, but you get the idea. There are still violent Christians out there, or if you'd rather "Christian-inspired violence," and they are contemporary examples.

In India there are numerous cases of women being attacked and the attackers going unpunished. Not a Christian example, but not a Muslim one either. Similar things can and do happen all over the world where there isn't a strong enough rule or law or respect for women. There are many countries in the world today where marital rape isn't a crime, and they are not all Muslim countries. Even in the United States and other western countries it wasn't a crime within people's lifetime.

But instead of more examples I'd like to posit the idea that violence isn't specifically due to religion, but to lack of effective and impartial governments and/or law enforcement. In other words, if you're in a country where you can't rely on the police to come to your aid then you're probably more likely to be a victim of an attack by the criminals who feel they can act with impunity. I'm not saying that this is the only factor, and I'm not trying to absolve any religious group from any complacency or complicity on their part. I'm saying that without an effective government, such as in a war-torn country, it is much easier for extremists to fill the void left by police/government who don't have the means to protect people and/or enforce laws.

When I criticize the laws in the Islamic world I'm not even talking about war torn countries like Syria (though the situation is certainly not better there). You have more prevalent Islamic countries like Iran, Egypt and UAE where it's illegal by law to have gay sex. Perhaps the biggest offender is Saudi Arabia where you can see signs like ones in the spoiler and the blogger receiving 1000 lashes for blasphemy. I mean sure, there were groups like KKK, but we're not talking about the 19th century here, are we? (yes, I know KKK still exists, but it's not even close to being relevant today)

Spoiler:

True, there are countries with low women's rights in non-Islamic countries, but on the flip side, most if not all Islamic countries have low women's rights. I highly doubt it's by coincidence.

Although we've gone too far off-topic to comfortably discuss this like you said (maybe we can discuss further on another thread if you wish to do so?), ultimately my point is that this tragic incident doesn't represent the right as being anti-Muslim as much as violent riots in Berkeley doesn't represent leftists as being violent.

 

[Esper]

When I criticize the laws in the Islamic world I'm not even talking about war torn countries like Syria (though the situation is certainly not better there). You have more prevalent Islamic countries like Iran, Egypt and UAE where it's illegal by law to have gay sex. Perhaps the biggest offender is Saudi Arabia where you can see signs like ones in the spoiler and the blogger receiving 1000 lashes for blasphemy. I mean sure, there were groups like KKK, but we're not talking about the 19th century here, are we? (yes, I know KKK still exists, but it's not even close to being relevant today)

Spoiler:

True, there are countries with low women's rights in non-Islamic countries, but on the flip side, most if not all Islamic countries have low women's rights. I highly doubt it's by coincidence.

Although we've gone too far off-topic to comfortably discuss this like you said (maybe we can discuss further on another thread if you wish to do so?), ultimately my point is that this tragic incident doesn't represent the right as being anti-Muslim as much as violent riots in Berkeley doesn't represent leftists as being violent.

This is getting too far off topic, yeah, but I just wanna say that there are more things that go toward making up a country and its laws and culture and morals than just religion. Lots of Muslim countries have had bad dealings with Western/European countries (colonization, etc.) which can lead to reactionary events and give hardliner religious groups more power than they might have otherwise had.