French authorities want to block Tor and ban free Wi-Fi in wake of Paris terror attacks

[mailpup]

So you have no examples. Understood.

Irrelevant.

More importantly, the constitution has nothing to do with how France handles its security, which is what the thread is about.

You brought up the Japanese. I commented on that.

 

[davislane1]

Definition of Bigoted: Utterly intolerant of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

Then I'm not a bigot. I don't care if someone practices Islam.

"Show me a major economic policy drafted by an Asian nation explicitly to punish the United States for "past wrongs." I triple dog dare you, bro."

Well, obviously no major policy has ever been drafted for one single reason

Thank you.

I've read the Koran - something I highly doubt you have.... and I'd like you to quote where it says that war has been declared on the rest of the world... Yes, it does espouse converting nonbelievers - by force if necessary....

And there you have it.

If you'd bother doing some real research, you'd realize that the VAST majority of ALL religions are peaceful - religions tend to exist in order to keep people acting "rightly" - faith, obedience, etc... there are fanatics in all, unfortunately, which ruins it for everyone else....

Which religion is actively conducting mass murders against Russians, Americans, French, and Middle Eastern Christians and gays? (Hint: it isn't Buddhists.)

Irrelevant.

You brought up the Japanese. I commented on that.

From earlier:

Ah, but you said, "No social ills became of it." This is what I dispute.

Your inability to provide an example of a measurable long term consequence to the Japanese population is utterly relevant.

 

[Squid Surprise]

So you have no response to my quotes other than to purposely misread what I wrote eh? I answered your bigoted response... Where's your researched retort? Oh wait, you don't have one!

Go away you bigoted fool.

 

[davislane1]

So you have no response to my quotes other than to purposely misread what I wrote eh? I answered your bigoted response... Where's your researched retort? Oh wait, you don't have one!

Quran 2:191-193 -
And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun.

Quran 4:89 -
They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.

You, a few posts up:

Yes, it does espouse converting nonbelievers - by force if necessary....

The Crusades and Inquisition are irrelevant to the discussion, as neither campaign was consistent with the Bible. The "commands" of the New Testament are to spread the Gospel and protect the flock, peacefully. The Crusades and Inquisition were fought in disregard of both Jesus' teaching and the Apostle's guidance.

Jihad, on the other hand, is entirely consistent with the Quran and Islam.

Islamic values are also incompatible with Western values. For example, the majority of American Muslims believe they should have the choice to disregard US law in favor of Islamic law, among other things.

Given foreign Muslims have no right to residence in France, Britain, the United States, Canada, or any other nation outside of their respective homelands, the best way to manage the threat of Islamic terrorism like that of ISIS isn't to ban Tor or restrict wifi access. It's to deny entry to the population group causing the problem and to scrutinize the ones you can't legally deport.

Now, if you want to have a discussion on the birth rates, how culture influences politics and law, and how the two are related to Muslim immigration, we can do that too.

The point is, France is playing the politically correct game. No amount of surveillance of Christians, Atheists, Buddhists, Satanists, or Wiccans addresses the actual problem, which is Islam.

Edit: Figured I'd tack this on:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/62...ech-British-police-ISIS-radicalisation-London

One officer in London said the firebrand presidential hopeful was “pointing out something plainly obvious” whilst another in Lancashire said the police have to ask local Muslim leaders for PERMISSION before sending patrols into their communities.