To Hijab or not to Hijab

[Montmorency]

No, that wasn't the point. The threat from muggers is limited, local, and opportunistic. The threat from Islamist terrorist/jihadis is basically unlimited in scope. Their attacks demand careful ideological analysis and planning on the part of the perpetrators.

To say that Charlie Hebdo invited attack by mocking radical Islam is not really any more meaningful than to say that the Jewish supermarket or museum invited attack.

No it doesn't go that far back.

What? No. The rest is basically wrong too.

[Husar]

No, that wasn't the point. The threat from muggers is limited, local, and opportunistic. The threat from Islamist terrorist/jihadis is basically unlimited in scope. Their attacks demand careful ideological analysis and planning on the part of the perpetrators.

To say that Charlie Hebdo invited attack by mocking radical Islam is not really any more meaningful than to say that the Jewish supermarket or museum invited attack.

But if they didn't invite attack, why were they attacked and why did they have police protection? At the very least they knew they were in dangerous waters. Which is not to say that I blame them or think they deserved what happened, but it was a consequence of their decisions to keep spreading the cartoons they wanted to spread despite obvious threads. Whether a thread is local or global is inconsequential as long as you can expose yourself to it or not. The 9/11 attack was different in that I don't think anyone inside knew they were a target. Both attacks are obviously wrong but CH made themselves a far more visible target, it's a bit like climbing a tree during a thunderstorm. You get no guarantee that you get struck by lightning but you aren't exactly making it less likely with our behavior. Although I do agree that people should have the right and that it is not inherently morally wrong to climb a tree during a thunderstorm.

[AE Bravo]

Why would you butt ur head in a discussion without correcting me. Shoo shoo

[Brenus]

"why did they have police protection?" From the time they were bomb-fired by Catholic Extremists for an offensive picture of the Pope.
"but it was a consequence of their decisions to keep spreading the cartoons they wanted to spread despite obvious threads." Nope, Even the murderers said it was to avenge the Prophet, not to shut-up them. So, even if they had decided to shut-up, they would have been killed.
So, if I understand well, freedom is not in the frame of the law, but in the frame of a target decided by murderers. It they kill you, it is your fault, you shouldn't have offended them.

Funny, it is all what the wife's abusers say in court: Your Honour, if she would do all what I want even without me saying, I wouldn't have hit her.

[Husar]

"why did they have police protection?" From the time they were bomb-fired by Catholic Extremists for an offensive picture of the Pope.

Thanks, so basically they already knew that a lot of people don't like what they do. And they chose to do it anyway.

"but it was a consequence of their decisions to keep spreading the cartoons they wanted to spread despite obvious threads." Nope, Even the murderers said it was to avenge the Prophet, not to shut-up them. So, even if they had decided to shut-up, they would have been killed.

So they were completely unaware that some muslims do not like Mohammed cartoons when they made their first one?
Now you just make them sound incredibly naive.

So, if I understand well, freedom is not in the frame of the law, but in the frame of a target decided by murderers. It they kill you, it is your fault, you shouldn't have offended them.

Funny, it is all what the wife's abusers say in court: Your Honour, if she would do all what I want even without me saying, I wouldn't have hit her.

You don't understand well because I said none of that.
What I said is that sometimes your actions have consequences in reality, that does not mean anyone is excused or anyone is blamed, it's just reality. They are dead in reality even though they shouldn't be. We could also ban ISIS tomorrow but that alone wouldn't make them disappear tomorrow, or would it? I think that is what Gilrandir's point boils down to as I have trouble seeing him as someone who thinks that it is morally right to avenge the prophet with blood and silence others to defend him, but he can correct me if I'm wrong.