Isaac David makes good points, and writing it off as racist and discrimination is ridiculous. The people who did these things may indeed be bloodlusty assholes, but what led them to this is important too, and denying that will only ensure that it is not understood, not addressed. I don't care if this is the way to tolerance, either - tolerance by itself is meaningless; all you need to do is ignore, and not question, and you can perhaps tolerate anything. What is more difficult is understanding and love, because for these you have to learn, but these are also what actually connect people and allow them to help each other, and to help prevent tragedies like these.

But if you really don't wish to see this discussed, then simply do not discuss it. Don't tell people to shut the fuck up, simply let this aspect of the thread die on its own.

We work on these projects to help people learn, and to learn ourselves. Fae's proposal was not a bad one to this end, and Gnangarra brings up related topics that are also of relevance. These should not be at odds, as these are all important, and all worth working on, covering, building upon.

On 16/11/15 07:14, Pierre-Selim wrote:
Just +1 on the stfu.
Le 16 nov. 2015 7:53 AM, "Christophe Henner" <>
a écrit :

I'm sorry but just shut the fuck up about "religion".

They're bloodlusty assholes that wanted to kill and divide. Nothing more.

It's not a religious thing (Paris isn't à holy city) or a cultural thing.
It's hate. Simple and plain hate.

They'd like us to say it's about religion and culture. Because that jump
starts the next sentence, it's us versus them where us has a better
culture. And then to start discriminating in our own country.

Because us vs them is the basis of any racist speech.

So please stop making it about culture and religion. Or if you want to make
it about culture, make it about the real culture they attacked : tolerance,
understanding, love.

That would the best answer we could make.


PS: sorry for this email I don't usually send those but hey after that
week-end I couldn't restrain myself
Le 16 nov. 2015 7:24 AM, "Isaac David" <> a
écrit :

Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen <

a écrit :

Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who
on one pile.

I don't know how anyone could be more explicit on his treatment of the
problems of making an overt generalisation, yet you attack me personally
the alleged grounds that I have accused all religious people of being

Just as if a religion, any religion is needed for people to
get off the rails. There are plenty of examples of that.

I never said so. I don't think so. Jainism serves as a good example of
faith-based beliefs may be completely harmless depending on what the
are. However, I do think  religion is one of the ways some people get off
the rails, and that this is a problem that goes largely underestimated
unacknowledged, firstly because most people subscribe to a religion and
second because it is so easy to confuse the criticism of intolerance and
bigotry with actual intolerance and bigotry. But this is irrelevant as
as my original reply to Gnangarra and Vandenberg are concerned because I
didn't even touch that point. All I said is that I find it extremely
dishonest to claim that these attacks had nothing to do with Islam,
whatever the extremism and interpretations of ISIS might be and however
disconnected and offensive their deeds might look like for the rest of

As to who is an actual Muslim and who understands the sunna and its
interpretation particularly in the light of Daesh, they are two distinct
Any typical Muslim will leave the finer points to the scholars,

"Leaving" sounds like a bad idea. What is so great about experts is that
they shortcut the access to wisdom, but they shouldn't be used as an
to waive intellectual responsibility. Scholars disagree, scholars make
mistakes , and it will be up to the average person to evaluate the
at hand. Scholars seldom enroll into armed conflict, average people do.

any typical Muslim will disagree with Daesh on many major points.
I'm so glad they do and I would like to thank them for it, but this
doesn't change a bit the relationship of Islam as a many-stranded
and the attacks at Paris. On the other hand I'm not so comfortable that
said major points don't include things like intolerance for other faiths,
specially non-Abrahamic ones, death penalty for adultery, the imposition
Sharia in Western judicial systems and other topics which are agreed upon
by big fractions of Muslims.[1]

By the way, I have no special focus on your religion; it's part of the
subject of this thread.


On 15 November 2015 at 23:09, Isaac David <>

  Yes, because there are many nice self-avowed Jewish, Muslims,
  etc. around the world. Therefore when some bad people do something
  in the name of their cultural and ideological identity it actually has
  nothing to do with the ideas themselves, it's always got to be some
  historical, social or psychological factor, otherwise we would be
  bad guys with good guys.

  But who are you to decide who is an actual Muslim and who isn't?

  Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 15:47, John Mark Vandenberg <>
  écrit :

  On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Gnangarra <>

   Not sure we should be making such  a link as the events in Paris are
   about Islam just as the actions of the women in Kentucky was not a
   reflection of Christianity. Paris is not the only place its
   its not even the latest place to fall victim to ISIS.

   Wikimedia is a world wide community and the focus on Paris ignores
   other communities who have over the last week, months. year or
   been affected by acts of terrorism, I think we should exercise care
  when we
   adopt activities that elevate events or imply some guilt of
   immortalizing that as fact in a place like wikipedia

  Very much agree broadly with Gnangarra, especially about links with
  The most positive and wiki way to respond is to ensure we're being
  neutral, and that the reality of all attacks around the world are
  being adequately and accurately recorded in a balanced manner from a
  worldwide perspective.

  However the attack on Paris is widely viewed as an escalation, not
  because a citizen of one country is more valued than another, because
  some places are more treasured by larger number of people of the
  world, and also we're more shocked as we expect they are better
  protected, and that creates an elevation of its own.

  I appreciate the Signpost for very tastefully responding, in a
  John Vandenberg

  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Reply via email to