Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

mailman.videolan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 737 posts

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#101

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

cygx wrote: post #64
iamthepieman wrote: post #37

I work with a Muslim and I'm a Christian. Since we are both very conservative, I actually have more in common with him than with my secular coworkers and friends. Unfortunately we both work remotely and live several hundred miles from each other. I think we could be good friends if we lived closer. One thing I have learned talking with my Muslim coworker is that, just like in Christianity, there are many divisions an…

Of course it's not "all Muslisms". But those who claim "it's only the terrorists" or "it's all politics" do not grasp the scope of the problem, ie that globally speaking, a significant number of adherents of Islam hold ideas that are incompatible with an open society. If you naively extrapolate from the 2013 Pew Poll The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society (which in principle represents nations with a tot…

>globally speaking, a significant number of adherents of Islam hold ideas that are incompatible with an open society.

You could say the same about the followers of other religions. And of certain popular political persuasions. And of many economic belief systems.

Just because adherents don't usually make the news by indiscriminately shooting members of the public doesn't mean they don't do incredible damage in other ways.

A public massacre is a horror, for obvious reasons. But it's not truly more horrible than many other everyday outrages, some of which take place on much bigger and longer timescales.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#102

Post by huac »

bad_user wrote: post #65
huac wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whereas the Catholic Church has a singular leader (the Pope), there is no equivalent in Islam. That is, currently - historically, Caliphs have been religious and political leaders. ISIS claims to take up that throne now, but...

Not sure what you mean, but as an Eastern Orthodox I do not recognize the catholic Pope or its authority.

sure - and the same would be said by a Protestant or pretty much any other denomination of Christianity. my point is - while the Pope can speak for Catholics (and apologize), there is no Muslim equivalent to 'apologize' for terrorist activity.

of course, the point is moot, because these terrorist attacks were not taken out by mainstream Muslims. the Crusades were officially backed by the Church and its leaders.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#103

Post by echaozh »

DanBC wrote: post #87
sumedh wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm Muslim and the problem is not about Islam. Its time to get our heads out of the sand. Religion is part of the problem whether its Islam or Christianity etc. I agree other factors play a role too. Religion is the best tool to brainwash people.

Animal rights extremists don't use religion. Right wing extremists don't use religion. Left wing extremists didn't use religion. Radicalisation does not need religion.

Religion is among the best tools to brainwash people then. If something really makes sense, you don't need people to believe it blindly.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#104

Post by brohee »

thaway9837 wrote: post #71

With all the respect for his contributions and good demeanor, sadly, this guy has no clue on what islam is and playin moslem like most of the 1.5 billion so called moslems. Which causes islam to be seen as a peaceful religion. No. Islam is the thing that creates these lunatics. I'm from Turkey, and I've been surrounded with islam for all my life. Problem with this kind of people is: they have created their own religi…

You can find pretty horrific stuff in the Bible too (I don't have time to look for much more but http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/22-21.htm is a good example).

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/ is a good tool to go to the juicy parts quickly.

Both the Qoran and the Bible (and some other sacred books) are full of stuff that is horrific, yet discarded as obviously outdated by 99.9999% of their practitionners. In my book judging a religion by a litteral interpretation is like studying law ignoring jurisprudence, it's not smart.

BTW Parisian here, and I went out to eat pork and drink alcohol on saturday night, because we shall continue to live as we did, and so should the other victims of the crazies, whether in Syria, Lebanon or elsewhere

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#105

Post by bad_user »

daemonk wrote: post #68
iamthepieman wrote: post #37

I work with a Muslim and I'm a Christian. Since we are both very conservative, I actually have more in common with him than with my secular coworkers and friends. Unfortunately we both work remotely and live several hundred miles from each other. I think we could be good friends if we lived closer. One thing I have learned talking with my Muslim coworker is that, just like in Christianity, there are many divisions an…

Is there an absolute definition to these categories though? I would be pissed off too if I was a Muslim and the radical minority hijacked the terminology and twisted it into something different. But to the radical Muslims, their definition is the correct one. How do you argue which definition is more correct than the other? By Historical precedence? By how we interpret the teachings? By popularity? It just seems like…

We Christians are separated into multiple denominations as well. You've got catholics, protestants and eastern orthodox as the biggest ones. The break between catholics and eastern orthodox happened in what is called "the great schism" in the 11th century. It has been attributed to theological disputes by the church, but nobody believes that, as everybody knows the dispute was entirely political in nature.

And the blend of eastern orthodoxy from my country has its own flavor, compared to the the general eastern orthodoxy branch, as we've also picked up a set of local customs and traditions along the way. Consequently I think this is why, even though atheism is on the rise and even though I'm what you could call an agnostic, I happen to believe that religion is ultimately good, as it's a part of the local culture, the local culture being a huge part of our identity.

But speaking of Christianity, our local christians tend to be a little xenophobe. And this I never understood why it happens, because you know, Christianity being about the teachings of Christ above all else, with those teaching inviting us first and foremost to love our peers and to be more tolerant. Skipping over the obvious that sometimes Christianity has nothing to do with the teaching of Christ, I personally think it's more about the true human nature. I believe that in essence a large part of the population is xenophobe, fearing and hating what is different and the material is always there to be exploited by a capable leader that can canalize all that potential hatred towards a common goal that can blur our ethics. After all, we should always remember the nazis, as that's the history that shows us how an otherwise civilized society can turn overnight if you press the right buttons, the anti-pattern we should steer away from.

Which brings me to the point that I wanted to make. I see a lack of tolerance and hatred even in many atheists, having the same potential for evil as everybody else, atheists who otherwise claim to be more enlightened. Not all of them of course, just like how not all Muslims are jihadists. And so I don't think changing the naming would make that much of a difference.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#106

Post by pluma »

StavrosK wrote: post #51
Luc wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Besides, the hits were driven by politics, religion is just a facade. I wonder how can you call the main motivation of these jihadists 'just a facade'?

Because if their motivation was to spread Islam, there are better ways to do it.

How does "it's about religion" imply "they're trying to spread their religion"? It's about cultural dominance. It doesn't have to make heretics convert, it just has to make them scared of heresy.

Terrorist attacks aren't about defeating the enemy, they're about terrorizing the enemy and inciting them to make the wrong decisions -- like mistreating peaceful Muslims and thereby supporting the Islamists' propaganda that this is a jihad in defence of Islam.

The easiest way to gain sympathy is to portray yourself as the victim and your attacks as righteous self-defence.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#107

Post by kriztw »

DanBC wrote: post #87
sumedh wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm Muslim and the problem is not about Islam. Its time to get our heads out of the sand. Religion is part of the problem whether its Islam or Christianity etc. I agree other factors play a role too. Religion is the best tool to brainwash people.

Animal rights extremists don't use religion. Right wing extremists don't use religion. Left wing extremists didn't use religion. Radicalisation does not need religion.

All of those are ideologies with certain views on how the world is and how it should be, which can also said of religions.

If religions where purely spiritual and said nothing about the world then I would agree with you, but then I guess there wouldn't be any problems either.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#108

Post by iamthepieman »

drinchev wrote: post #95
iamthepieman wrote: post #37

I work with a Muslim and I'm a Christian. Since we are both very conservative, I actually have more in common with him than with my secular coworkers and friends. Unfortunately we both work remotely and live several hundred miles from each other. I think we could be good friends if we lived closer. One thing I have learned talking with my Muslim coworker is that, just like in Christianity, there are many divisions an…

Hello. I really like your honesty, courage and passion that I can sense from what you wrote. I don't want to sound offending, but you are saying that you are happy to discuss this and I have almost no contact with deep religious persons that are in IT, so I have a couple of questions. 1. Where is the boundary of your beliefs? I'm always trying to be polite with my dev co-workers, but for example if I write a flagged…

Hi these don't offend me at all but I think they deserve a more thoughtful response than I am able to give at this moment. I'll try to write a proper response during lunch today.

Ok I've got some time now for a brief response.

1. There are none. And where there are I try to push them. I don't really see your example as a boundary issue. If other people malign or ridicule my beliefs it doesn't really bother me except to feel sadness for those people.

2. Acts 17:11 says: Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so.

It's out of context but basically its commending the Berean Jews for closely examining the teachings they were receiving from the apostles to verify that they were true. My faith demands rationality and my God is a rational God.

3. The Bible is not a science text book. The Bible is not a fairy tale either. I accept the bible as true understanding that it's purpose is not to teach me about scientific phenomenon. The travesty to me about evolution and the big bang is not that it is or isn't opposed to biblical teachings, it's that it is such a huge distraction from the true message of my faith.

4. No. This is the one I'm most likely to get into an argument about because history itself is subject to manipulation and interpretation. Has the bible been used to nefarious purpose? Yes. Is the bible's purpose nefarious? No.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#109

Post by pluma »

rmc wrote: post #8
StavrosK wrote: post #2

Isn't it sad that this has to be said at all? "Hey, not every adherent of a religion supports killing innocent people of a different religion". It'd be like us having to apologize for the Crusades. Besides, the hits were driven by politics, religion is just a facade.

> It'd be like us having to apologize for the Crusades. Or like Americans having to apologise for drone stikes, for Iraq and Afghanistan, and specific attacks like the MSF hospital in Kunduz.

To be fair, the US has had a reputation of sloppy warfare before 2001. The only difference between now and then is that it's happening to brown people instead of yellow people or black people.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#110

Post by ramblerman »

DanBC wrote: post #81
cygx wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's not "all Muslisms". But those who claim "it's only the terrorists" or "it's all politics" do not grasp the scope of the problem, ie that globally speaking, a significant number of adherents of Islam hold ideas that are incompatible with an open society. If you naively extrapolate from the 2013 Pew Poll The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society (which in principle represents nations with a tot…

A bunch of Americans think US free speech doesn't apply to hate speech. (Although I accept that they don't want to kill you for it). A bunch of Americans think you should be killed for being black; or gay; or trans. A bunch of Americans don't think rape is actually rape - "s/he didn't fight back!", "s/he had a beer!" Lots of people have wrong ideas.

Precisely! and wrong ideas need to be challenged unequivocally regardless of their origin or dogma.

Although I don't think that is the point you were trying to make.

Post reply on HN