Thread: Paris Terror Attack

Kerry: "The Biggest Error We Could Make Would Be To Blame Muslims Collectively For Crimes Not Committed By Muslims Alone"
Posted on January 23, 2015

Addressing the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland today, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said, "the biggest error that we could make would be to blame Muslims collectively for crimes not committed by Muslims alone." Kerry said we are increasingly fighting back, "but in doing so we also have to keep our heads."

Kerry likened the threat we face today to that of the kind of world that lead to World War II.

"Now, need I remind you, the 20th century was defined by the civilized world struggle to develop the rule of law as an alternative to chaos, disorder and dictatorship," Kerry said. "Today we are witnessing nothing more than a form of criminal anarchy, a nihilism which illegitimately claims an ideological and religious foundations."

"Obviously," Kerry said, "the biggest error that we could make would be to blame Muslims collectively for crimes not committed by Muslims alone. Crimes that the overwhelming majority of Muslims oppose."

JOHN KERRY, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: It seems that terrorists are now competing with each other for recruits and perpetrating ever more macabre crimes. Now, need I remind you, the 20th century was defined by the civilized world struggle to develop the rule of law as an alternative to chaos, disorder and dictatorship. And today we are witnessing nothing more than a form of criminal anarchy, a nihilism which illegitimately claims an ideological and religious foundations. Against this enemy, we are increasingly organizing and fighting back, but in doing so we also have to keep our heads. Obviously, the biggest error that we could make would be to blame Muslims collectively for crimes not committed by Muslims alone. Crimes that the overwhelming majority of Muslims oppose. Crimes that their faith utterly rejects and that Muslim leaders themselves have the greatest ability to address. Religions don't require adherence to be raze villages and blow up people, it's individuals with a distorted and an even ignorant interpretation of religion who do that.

Video at link : http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ims_alone.html

we are opposing islamic extremists and terrorists and not the muslim world...did someone forget to tell him that? he refers to the state of the world that led to WWII where in case he doesn't know, a country was led by hitler who brainwashed or backed people into corners with the threat of death to go after people based on their religion, sexual preference, way of life, mental and physical disabilities. hitler was the supreme leader and his word was the only one that counted. how would you feel if the leader of your country told you that you have no say and things will be done his way because he knows better than you? uh oh.....i think i have heard someone recently saying the same thing!

What Obama Just Said About the Paris Terror Attacks is Beyond Belief

by Brooke Bosca |on February 10, 2015

Is there any length to which Barack Obama will not go to lie, obfuscate and whitewash the evils of Islam?




President Obama has hit a new low in failing to describe the evil of Islamist terrorism with a deliberate lie about some victims of the Paris terror attacks in early January.

In an interview with the lefty website Vox.com, Obama condescended to acknowledge Americans have a right to be “deeply concerned” about terrorist violence. Then he went on to lie about what actually happened on Jan. 9.

“It is entirely legitimate for the American people to be deeply concerned when you’ve got a bunch of violent, vicious zealots who behead people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris...”

Randomly shoot? In a deli?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9ahKxjCYAA2-iQ.png

The victims of the attack on the Hypercacher supermarket weren’t attacked randomly. They were murdered by an Islamist killer because they were Jews, in a Jewish Kosher store. (Not a “deli,” Mr. President. And a place so Jewish the name means “hyper kosher” in French.)

The Twitter world erutped in justified scorn.

Denise Tamir @dtamir84

RANDOMLY shoot a bunch of folks in a deli?
Really?
Nothing random about it.
The terrorist wanted to kill Jews.... http://fb.me/7a2qMc6Rt



1:05 AM - 10 Feb 2015

As Joe Saunders said:



As a distortion of the truth, it’s not even on a par with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s line about the Benghazi attack of September 2012 being committed by “guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans.”

It’s worse.

And even from a president who’s spent six years spouting nonsense, it’s hard to believe.

http://toprightnews.com/?p=8292

See also

‘Insane': Josh Earnest’s sick defense of Obama’s ‘random’ shooting remarks
http://twitchy.com/2015/02/10/truly-...remarks-video/

‘Really? Really.’ Vox’s Max Fisher: Obama’s ‘random’ remarks just a ‘micro-gaffe’
http://twitchy.com/2015/02/10/really...a-micro-gaffe/

‘Charlie Hebdo’ Bans Muhammad Cartoons Following Terrorist Attack, Will Continue To Criticize Religion



Charlie Hebdo will no longer depict caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad, says the magazine’s top editor. The Washington Post reported that the infamous French satire magazine came to this decision following the emotional aftermath of the January 7 terrorist attack. On that day, two Islamic militants stormed the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris and began shooting. Twelve people were killed.

Initially, Charlie Hebdo took a defiant stance. The very first issue after the horrific incident featured a weeping Muhammad holding up a “Je Suis Charlie” sign. But attitudes have changed in the months since. A cartoonist who survived the terrorist incident left Charlie Hebdo in May. Renald Luzier, known professionally as “Luz,” was the man behind the first Charlie Hebdo drawing following the shooting.

However, Luz said that he no longer had any interest in drawing The Prophet or dealing with having to replace so many of his fallen colleagues.

“The time came when it was just all too much to bear. There was next to nobody to draw the cartoons. I ended up doing three or every four front-pages. Each issue is torture because the others are gone. Spending sleepless nights summoning the dead, wondering what Charb, Cabu, Honore, Tignous would have done is exhausting.”

The mental and emotional toll on those who survived the January attack could partially explain why Charlie Hebdo won’t post any more pictures of Muhammad. That aside, editor Laurent Sourisseau stated in an interview that the magazine had nothing else to prove on the free speech front.

“We’ve done our job,” said Sourisseau. “We have defended the right to caricature.”

The tragic deaths of the journalist at the hands of Islamic extremists touched off a firestorm of controversy over free speech. Some wondered if provoking Muslims willing to die (or kill) for their religion was a wise use of freedom of expression. Others felt that the freedom to criticize religions however they see fit must< be protected -- even if such critiques are a safety risk.

For the survivors who continued to work for Charlie Hebdo, mocking Muhammad in any way became something of a sore point. At least now the pictures of the religious figure are banned from future Charlie Hebdo magazines. Some observers view this as a surrender. Despite the ban on Mohammad images, the top editor insists that the Charlie Hebdo magazine will continue to criticize Islam and other religions.

Do you think Charlie Hebdo is right to stop publishing caricatures of Muhammad? Share your thoughts below!

http://www.inquisitr.com/2263993/cha...cize-religion/