This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
'Charlie Hebdo' & French Revolution: Setting Aside Emotion & Seeking Reason
Submitted by Charles Gave via Evergreen Gavekal,
Une nation est une ame, un principe spirituel. Deux choses qui, a vrai dire, n’en font qu’une, constituent cette ame, ce principe pirituel. L’une est dans le passe, l’autre dans le present. L’une est la possession en commun d’un riche legs de souvenirs ; l’autre est le consentement actuel, le desir de vivre ensemble, la volonte de continuer a faire valoir l’heritage qu’on a recu indivis.
Ernest Renan, Conference a la Sorbonne, March 1883
In order to define a nation Ernest Renan spoke of a will to live together, from which emerged the institution of the state. This state would then have a monopoly on violence (except for genuine cases of self-defense).
Throughout history, there have been cases where this willingness to live together vanished because part of a population wanted to break away and form another nation (the US civil war, Yugoslavia). There have also been cases where a regime has captured a legitimate state using violence against a population that was, in fact, willing to live together (Russia under the communists?). It can also occur when a big part of the population expresses a desire to live under different rules, and this desire spills into armed conflict (the Spanish civil war).
What happened last week in Paris begs the question whether Western Europe faces a problem in the last category; i.e., does France and its neighbors have a part of their population that rejects the rules on which the nation is based, and wishes to build a nation under a different set of rules? At the outset, it is important to draw a distinction between the two assassins of the Charlie Hebdo staff, and the lone killer of the kosher supermarket. Indeed, the Charlie Hebdo killers operated under the principles of a different civilization; principles that are very much the opposite of those that hold the French nation together (respect for free speech, etc…) but principles nonetheless. Meanwhile, the murders in the kosher supermarket are of a different nature. There, defenseless people were murdered simply for being Jewish, an outcome completely devoid of any principles other than the crassest form of anti-Semitism, which no religion condones.
The courageous Charlie Hebdo journalists took a risk and paid with their lives. As the wife of cartoonist Georges Wolinski put it, he died in the ‘field of battle, with heroes and men of honor’. Wolinski, Charb, Cabu and all the other Charlie Hebdo staff died defending the ideals they believed in and nothing can be greater than that. In the second case the fact that the Islamist fundamentalist murdered civilians simply for being Jewish makes it a more ghastly act; something akin to the events in Toulouse a couple of years ago. For every Frenchman, the first set of murders should inspire rage. The second set of murders should inspire shame and outrage. The heroes at Charlie Hebdo had taken a calculated risk which they embraced and assumed. The second set of victims had done nothing more but share the faith of their forefathers.
Which brings us back to the simple fact that the Charlie journalists were assassinated in application of a [blasphemy] law, which France rejects, but a law that, in the eyes of religious fundamentalists, trumps all others. At least, this much is clear from the declarations of the assassins who, on the scene of the crime declared ‘we have avenged the prophet’. Very clearly, the Charlie Hebdo killers did not share in what Renan called le legs constitutif de l’ame francaise. Instead, their reference points where, they seem to believe, in a legs constitutif of the Muslim ummah. And if this this is the case, then we should ask ourselves a number of questions:
1. The first is that the men who committed these crimes were raised in schools of the French republic. So how did they come to reject, and even hate, the republic’s values so much?
2. The second is that most French people have no problem with Islam per se. This was clear after almost four million people yesterday walked in the name of tolerance, and also from the ‘pride’ taken in one of the policemen, who died defending the Charlie Hedbo office, being a Muslim, as was the young Malian supermarket clerk who helped shoppers hide from the murderous terrorist. Still, the question must be asked whether Western nations are nursing a small minority of individuals who want to impose a system of Sharia law that opposes everything the majority holds dear? And, if so, and if that minority is large enough, do we risk more blood on our streets (whether in Paris, Sydney, Ottawa, Toulouse…). The question that then emerges is what can Western nations do about it without compromising the values they hold dear?
3. The above is not a racist question (as some commentators hint). Indeed, profound devotion to the tenets of a religion does not emanate from nature (as races do) but from thought. In that regard, being an ‘islamistphobe’ is more akin to being a ‘communistphobe’ or a ‘fascistphobe’ then a racist. At stake is the question of whether fundamentalist Islam presents a core set of values and beliefs which may, or may not, prove compatible with a) democracy and b) the ability to live in the multicultural/ multi-value society most Western societies have come to cherish. For example, today, a record number of French Jews are emigrating to Israel because of the rising anti-Semitism which was on display at the Kosher supermarket—so if this emigration trend is pushed to its conclusion (i.e., no more Jews in France), France will end up being less of a multi-cultural society.
4. The question of Islam’s compatibility with Western democratic values is not a question that we, in the West, can answer. This is a question that only the Muslim world itself can answer. For example, can a line of the Koran be changed or interpreted in different ways? After all, like most holy books, the Koran states many contradictory things and one can find quotes to justify almost anything. But the Koran is different from other religious books in that it was written by Mohammed, but dictated by God (through an archangel). Meanwhile, the Torah, as well as the Ancient and New Testaments, were written by men, inspired (or not) by God. These men are accepted to have been imperfect, unlike Mohammed, whom as the Charlie Hebdo staff paid dearly to show, one cannot criticize. So the Bible can be criticized and even re-interpreted. Can the Koran? Can this be done without criticizing the prophet? Or is the Sharia not adaptable and thus, for the true followers, an almost guarantee of conflicting systems?
Let us hope that this latest drama forces the Muslim World to confront these challenging questions. As far as France and most other Western nations are concerned, it is obvious that these questions will now, more than ever (and in spite of the mainstream politicians’ best efforts to keep them out) enter the political stream and discourse. And instead of calming tensions in an era of great economic discomfort, this will likely amplify them.
»
- 9901 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Theatre critic.
Written in the finest divide and conquer fashion du jour.
Demographics and the laws of Nature and physics can be a real motherfucker.
same as it ever was...
I wonder what Notre Dame will look like with minarets.
"The question of Islam’s compatibility with Western democratic values is not a question that we, in the West, can answer"
Which "democratic values" are we talking about... the post 9/11 police state ones or just the self-enriching neoliberalism and neoconservatism of our elite rulers in general?...
And of course the anti-American liberal Globalist loons have to chime in about America in the wake of the Paris attacks:
Meet Liam Neeson the Globalist Liberal Pro-Gun Control Moron of the Day
Yes, some Muslims wish to live under a different set of rules. And because that set of rules was such a roaring anti-success, they moved here.
For some idiotic reason though, they now want to bring those same idiotic rules here with them.
When Bubba joins the military here, he is told he is fighting for mom, apple pie, truth, justice, freedom, etc. If he were told he is fighting so that Saudi & Qatar can build a pipeline through Syria and supplant Russian gas sales to Europe, Bubba would probably think twice about that.
The same above applies to foreign intelligence operations recruiting Farouk just outside the mosque...just sayin'.
So what?
That's what 200 years of importing primarily anti-freedom pro-government immigrants did for the founding principles of America. The US is almost the complete opposite of what it was at its beginning.
All thanks to the socialists and fascists arriving on its shores.
been done in Palermo and Saint sophie. But that was before Lepanto.
You really think that Jihad can do anything else except kill local muslims?
Do you have any idea about the statistics of Muslim religious strife with crusaders/infidels vs with fellow muslims?
Biggest winner : FITNA, aka killing other muslims. Thats what we see in Syrac; muslims against muslims as with Boko Haram.
The christians did the same. They killed many more christians in their ideological wars (for religion or for nation) than they killed moslems.
Cherry on that cake : WW1 & WW2. Its easier to kill your neighbours than guys far away on a regular basis.
Can't believe I'm agreeing with falak again, the biggest losers historically are other muslims, possibly even the reverse of the Oran Massacre, where the government just steps aside and watches.
But what to with the ones who go off the rails?
My preference (and natch, I'm not muslim so I can be accused of "its easy to say") is deal with it "in house". Don't call the cops and increase the power of the police state for the sake of everyones freedom.
Just a suggestion, the community knows who the loose cannons are.
Yeah, it's inspired me to conjure the phrase "The clash of civilizations."
Think I'll write a book...
Really challenges your "world view" doesn't Ignatius.
Yes, my "weltanschauung", well played.
Yes. Well, playing with your schwauung might be the cause of the welts on it, Iggy.
( ducks )
"( ducks )"
Go Ducks!!
People and "leaders" will starting showing their true selves shortly...
...wait for it...
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." -- JFK
A few more of these attacks and the right wing will be running on all cylinders in Europe. Even with this latest attack, there has been a big drop off in muslim apologist rhetoric.
Ban immigration from Islamic countries
Whites have made a fetish of out-group altruism. IT works great until push comes to shove and you have to defend what is yours.
I don't think setting up puppet governments to control their oil and bombing the hell out of them is altruistic.
Rather, it's the typical behavior of animals.
The European citizenry fears more the 'born-in-country' than the 'brought-in-county'.
'Born in country': product of the Republic but psychologically massaged by false representations of the past of their ancestors as well as the constant inferiority complex infused by European intellectual imperialism.
That immigration you want to ban shouldnt have started in the 60s/70s when French, Belgian & co went on shopping in North Africa for cheap labour to fuel the now-dead insdustries.
"This state would then have a monopoly on violence (except for genuine cases of self-defense)."
And there's mistake #1 when it comes to government: What happens when one has a genuine need to defend himself against the State?
Well and truly said.
In my experience, the French discriminate like hell, but only on the basis of how well you speak French, preferably Bretton French. If the Muzzies can't make it in France, there is no chance anywhere else in Europe.
Does that also apply to 'elected officials' who consciously ignore the stated principes upon which their nation was founded - principles cleaarly ststed that they swore to defend and protect?
.....because we sure seem to have a far bigger problem when a nation's government rejects the pricciples upon which it was founded... a far bigger problem than having a few malcontents rejecting them
Free speech, eh?
Well, France, and Europe, has long now believed in carving out exceptions to the general principle.
It's really not a matter of causing offense, but of challenging state and other power structures.
ANY society has some people who want to form another nation and live under other rules. Almost none of these people want to harm other people to obtain their goals.
TPTB love attacks like the one that happened. This way they can scare people to abandon their freedom in the hope of obtaining a bit more security.
It is a matter of causing offense. Just ask them. And it IS about challenging the power structure too. Muzzies can't make it in France? They will soon be the majority, they can vote Sharia. Game over.
Tell me how Sharia Law can stop the fucking Zionist cunts from chemtrailing me all fucking day and I'll listen.
lot of anger there, and a few assumptions too... must be the chem's.... breathe deeply, relax. :-)
If you're saying its not toxic, tell me more. If you are saying chemtrails dont exist, I'd say you are kidding yourself.
Is anybody out there keeping track of how desperately twisted the ADL and AIPAC are spinning Charlie Hebdo with the lastest announcemet from the "usual suspects" in Hollywood like George Clooney telling us how good it makes him feel that people are standing for justice against "anti-semistism" over the deaths in France!...
If it's anything like the World Leaders that showed in that massive demonstration in Paris I'll be interested to find out how many Americans are actually concerned with anti-semitism in Paris these days given Ferguson and Manhattan!
We really are "truly" fucked!
For years they were insulting Muslims and Christians in the most provocative and rude way.
I am not Charlie.
Freedom of speech? In 2008, Bob Sine was fired from "ChD" for a joke on Sarkozy daughter. Sine's joke was considered as anti Semic.
+1000
This memo of Charles Gave is a truly remarkable synthesis of the current situation
indeed, it's quite good. nevertheless, I have one little qualm: "So the Bible can be criticized and even re-interpreted. Can the Koran? Can this be done without criticizing the prophet? Or is the Sharia not adaptable and thus, for the true followers, an almost guarantee of conflicting systems? "
some of those cartoons were not criticizing the Prophet of Islam or Islam. They were just ridiculing. And Islam has a ban on drawing a picture of the Prophet. Any picture. Even if you draw a triumphant Prophet of a triumphant Islam, it's still a problem in the eyes of devout Muslims.
Would it be really that difficult for cartoonists to criticize Islam without drawing a picture of the Prophet? Or for us all to recognize that it's a question of medium, not content?
Pussy Riot girls dancing naked in a Russian Church, or the burning of American Flags in the US pose similar problems, the problem of the anti-icon. Where does freedom stop and becomes only provocation? For me, at the point of that Charlie Hebdo cartoon where the Holy Trinity is engaged in a threesome. Really? Where is the criticism, there?
Some expression of thought are restricted, aren't they? The best example is pornography. Why? Because of it's indecency, or fitness to be exposed to a general public that includes the easily impressed
No, the Muslim population has no intent of integrating
And that has been their plan from the get go and the plan of the Globalists who opened the floodgates to them
Too much rationalisation. I live in Toulouse, where there was Merah a few years ago. Today, at a small meeting, our mayor at the time told us he was asked why there was so much islamists here when there is almost none in Marseilles (another city with lots of Muslims). The answer was simple : in Marseilles there are lot of crime and Mafia, and youngs who want to turn to violence engage in a criminal carrier. In Toulouse there is no Mafia, so the only to be violent is to become a radical Muslim.
PS: I like very much Renan's "life of Jesus".Written by an atheist professor of theology...
there is no mafia in Paris region either...
The real reason is the crass arrogance of french elites who have neglected to watch and monitor the evolution of the "ghetto" areas, since the 1980s.
"Touches pas à mon pôte" / (Sos Racism movement of 1980s, aka french affirmative action) was just a political trick to get minority group people high profile jobs in the elites as "socialists". It didn't look at the core problems.
In fact the ENA elites, who fill the Prefecture and adminstration corpo-structures have no statistics of socio-economic and cultural disaffection in these ghettos, as its illegal to make social statistics by ethnic origin or religion.
So if you don't have the tools, the thermometer, how can you tell if the patient has temperature ?
This is a typical example of french elitist head up ass "top down" thinking. The great theory and no empirical verification on ground for decades!
We talk about the fight against "obscurantism" and "fanaticism" by secular statist France.
What we forget is the obscuranticism of the elites who live in total OPAciTY without any counter-checks and who are so navel gaze oriented their corporate fanaticism is just hard to believe to protect their own ingrained MYTHS.
Thats why the good people of France alternate between garrulous populist exasperation and great epic solidarity moments.
And the elites just keep sleeping on their laurels like the Ottoman Janisserie that they be !
Damn falak, that was pretty good, plus one.
This: "In fact the ENA elites, who fill the Prefecture and adminstration corpo-structures have no statistics of socio-economic and cultural disaffection in these ghettos, as its illegal to make social statistics by ethnic origin or religion."
Here they do it just the opposite, they simply percieve an economic or cultural problem and then suffocate the life out of whoever they deem a victim with bureaucracy.
I was first exposed to some of these weird French laws on a Banzai thread, only they had to do with freedom of speech & press...you guys must have more lawyers per capita than us!...lol.
For an elitist class, all based on meritocracy, in a structure built by Napoleon, they have all the powers; as the state controls 57% of French wealth via taxes, and social + pension contributions.
As a reminder in 1981 when Mitterrand was elected that statistic was 46%.
With a gargantuan control of economy of that scale you'd think these guys would at least be coherent.
They are coherent... in hiding their total incoherence which has balooned as no checks and balances, no whistle blowing.
Thats what networks are all about. Deadly serious.
Bien dit Falak!
I wonder whether this last episode is not the final hit on the wedge that pushes the two side forever apart. Unreconcilable divergences and growing animosity.
From what I gather, the North African muslims in France (not referring to the 'representatives' of the muslims in France) stand in strong opposition with the narrative designed and circulated whilst the rest all wear 'Je suis Charlie' black tshirt!
Where were those Blackwater snipers yesterday?
LETS focus on hating Islam, instead of the massive ECONOMIC CRISIS !
We have our Patsy
Start the WAR machines and grind some meat
We have cheep oil and lots of tanks n battleships
Carnage for Peace
Assholes, sign up and heres your hollow point ammo
"We aspire not to equality but to domination. The country of a foreign race must become once again a country of serfs, of agricultural laborers, or industrial workers. It is not a question of eliminating the inequalities among men but of widening them and making them into a law."
That rings clear, haughty, and brutal and plants us squarely in the middle of howling savagery. But let us come down a step.
Who is speaking? I am ashamed to say it: it is the Western humanist, the "idealist" philosopher. That his name is Renan is an accident. That the passage is taken from a book entitled La Refonne intellectuelle et morale, that it was written in France just after a war which France had represented as a war of right against might, tells us a great deal about bourgeois morals.
The regeneration of the inferior or degenerate races by the superior races is part of the providential order of things for humanity. With us, the common man is nearly always a declasse nobleman, his heavy hand is better suited to handling the sword than the menial tool. Rather than work, he chooses to fight, that is, he returns to, his first estate. Regere imperio populos, that is our vocation. Pour forth this all-consuming activity onto countries which, like China, are crying aloud for foreign conquest. Turn the adventurers who disturb European society into a ver sacrum, a horde like those of the Franks, the Lombards, or the Normans, and every man will be in his right role. Nature has made a race of workers, the Chinese race, who have wonderful manual dexterity and almost no sense of honor; govern them with justice, levying from them, in return for the blessing of such a government, an ample allowance for the conquering race, and they will be satisfied; a race of tillers of the soil, the Negro; treat him with kindness and humanity, and all will be as it should; a race of masters and soldiers, the European race. Reduce this noble race to working in the ergastulum like Negroes and Chinese, and they rebel. In Europe, every rebel is, more or less, a soldier who has missed his calling, a creature made for the heroic life, before whom you are setting a task that is contrary to his race - a poor worker, too good a soldier. But the life at which our workers rebel would make a Chinese or a fellah happy, as they are not military creatures in the least. Let each one do what he is made for, and all will be well.
Hitler? Rosenberg? No, Renan.
So it is simple, the Muslims can't take an oath to honor the country's principles of freedom or leave.
Just like politicians take oaths of office?
Would you be surprised if the foreign ideology expressed by one is expressed differently by the other?
You have already been infiltrated.
The 'leaders and elites' already sold out their constitutents and clients.
Immigrants are just another wedge to be used against you financially, socially and politically.
...Imported at your expense no less.
Society is based on lies?
While I'm not suggesting this was a pair of false flags - Netanyahu could not have planned it better himself.
At the Unity March - was he smiling at just how lucky he, and Israel, is?
Was he thinking of Moshiach?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFr4C2BPLeM
First - these Charlie Hebdo guys are nuts and amoral.
Second They don't deserve this destiny but people had had to beat shit out of them
Third - Muslim population has no intent of integrating
They will interest if you divide them and you will force them to integrate.
Seems France is a ticking bomb
Ya know thats the funny thing about it, when Andres Serrano did his "Piss Christ" work of art? he won all kinds of accolades and awards for it.
Catholics didn't grab AK's and go on shooting sprees.
Likewise when Robert Mapplethorpe did his homo-erotic and S&M art (one with a bullwhip stuck up his ass...lol, I shit you not) the Baptists didn't firebomb his exhibit.
If a minority of Muslims can't deal with the freedom of expression, speech & press, maybe they should leave instead of killing people.
I may not appreciate the finer aspects and "nuance" (lol) of either of these two "artists" work and I damned sure don't want the taxpayer to fund it but they are allowed to be offensive & provocative in the west.
''......fuck 'em if they cant take a joke ! .... ''
Real hero's live in my view.
Sometimes accidents happen of course....but I have zero sympathy for people who make fun of the after life.
What happens if God hates you too?
Bad finanical decisions and uncontrolled mass migration may result in a European Civil War. It could start with the declaratin of a caliphate in France in 2017 and spread from there. Here is a view of how this may happen - a sort of Turner's Diaries for France and EU.
https://eurocivilwar2017.wordpress.com/
There already is a civil war in Europe, Ukraine, from the Muslim socialist's perspective they already own all of Europe sans Switzerland (its on their list too) and they need expansion room and hard assets.
Financing a global corporate socialist business model requires feedstock or new lootees.
The EU Muslim immigrant business model requires massive state subsidies, or "donor investors " that would be Ukraine.
The plan was bribe the Ukraine gov into the EU, then loot with debt and mass Muslim and African imigration-BTW they * have the same plan for the USA.(in motion)
Had the Russians not rebelled Ukraine would be filling with MENA refugees as I type, cratering wages and raising rents and creating massive new debts and staggering profits for "the landlords" instead they're going elsewhere, most likely Greece, then UK and US.
" may result in a European Civil War"
no, not really: military training is something for the 1% of the population of Europe (Conscription has been abolished almost everywhere since at least a generation, we have no right to bear arms) and pacifism and political correctness 8for which, if you criticize anything about diversity you are immediately a racist) has been hammered in kids's heads since primary school for the last 60 years.
You need soldiers for a civil war or at least people who can think there is something worth fighting and dying for.
What a lovely perspective, thanks for this.
Cut the Crap: The problem is islam, and it has to be exterminated. Period.
Islam is a political system, NOT a religion, and unless and until humanity wakes the hell up and STOPS referring to it as a religion, there is no hope. Islam is a hyper-aggressive, militaristic, expansionist, totalitarian political system designed to create a super-rich micro-oligarchical ruling class with a massive, destitute, genetically handicapped underclass below. The paper-thin faux-religious facade was a conscious, specific con from the very beginning – much like Mormonism and Scientology – a pure racket using borrowed and piggy-backed religious motifs to lend credibility to a massive, loosely-knit network of crime syndicate cells.
There must be some jihadi skinnys registered here at ZH that go around automatically downvoting negative information about mohammedianism. To those people I say, FUCK YOU and your "PROPHET", shit be upon him.
Keep up the good work Ms. Barnhardt. You have a voice that needs to be heard.
I found this floating in the internet (not mine , but could not find the original author) :
Note Original cover he is holding : "The Koran is shit, it can't even stop bullets"
That's some wicked humor !
Good article. I enjoyed it.
Thanks
Were the French ever asked if they wanted millions of African and Muslim socialist refugee voters over a tiny 30 year period?
Or did it "just happen" like our Mexican invasion?
And when I say "just happen" I mean happen at the hands of an undisclosed but well organized international conspiracy?
Was there ever a vote on French non-sovereignty?
Or did they just lose it?
Prediction, Islam gets state protection in the EU, no more insulting comics or critical commentary of Islam.
Islam is the perfect tool for Socialist government, criticism is forbidden.
Je ne suis pas Charlie. We must condemn the violent acts of fanatics of whatever stripe. But we must also condemn provocations to violence that arise from the outrage that is produced by ridiculing and mocking the closely held beliefs of others. A multicultural society cannot tolerate actions that outrage a portion of the society. It cannot survive it. The unwritten rules of tolerance that have enabled the West to progress from its own Christian fanaticism to secular democracy must be observed, as a social convention if we are to safeguard the achievements that have been realized at great cost. It is my fervent hope, therefore, that "Charlie" will die the natural death which it deserves, and that no one attempts to resurrect it.
"A multicultural society cannot tolerate actions that outrage a portion of the society. It cannot survive it.
So.. no abortion, just to name one?
Our founding fathers wisely left to the states the adjudication of most social issues and criminal cases. They realized that there would always be regional differences in values in such a large country. This wisdom was disregarded by the Warren court in the case of Roe vs. Wade, which legalized abortion on demand through federal intervention. It should have been left to the individual states to determine. This created the great divide between conservatives and libertals on social issues which has become the breeding ground for extremist views and social discord.
Fucking vomit.
France is a divided population, some of whom like to get really angry about foreigners, another bunch who don't give a shit what happens as long as they can buy iCrap and bury their heads in the sand, and a tiny minority who realise what time it is.
This high minded idealist bullshit is only wheeled out when someone is attempting to capture the moral high ground to further their own specious argument. None of which counts anyway for as long as we are all under the yoke of the international finance cartels and conflict profiteers.
So why don't we dry our eyes a little, push the poetic statist dream-wank to the side and start confronting the real problem of how to regain self determinism after a century of overt control, murder and outright plunder. Or is everyone is so accustomed to manipulation and disempowerment that it's virtually undetectable, even when it's rubbing its balls on your stupid fleecy face?
"other than the crassest form of anti-Semitism, which no religion condones."
Really? NO religion?
Quran
[111.112] Ignominy shall be their portion [the Jews'] wheresoever they are found... They have incurred anger from their Lord, and wretchedness is laid upon them... because they disbelieve the revelations of Allah and slew the Prophets wrongfully... because they were rebellious and used to transgress.
[11,96] And thou wilt find them [the Jews] the greediest of mankind....
[3.18] Taste ye [Jews] the punishment of burning.
"They [the Jews] are the heirs of Hell.... They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is clear from what they say ... When evil befalls you they rejoice." Ibid. [Surah 111, v. 117-120]
Because of the wrongdoing of the Jews.... And of their taking usury ... and of their devouring people's wealth by false pretenses. We have prepared for those of them who disbelieve a painful doom.[Surah IV, v. 160, 161]
Allah hath cursed them [the Jews] for their disbelief.[Surah IV, v. 46]
Allah fighteth against them [the Jews]. How perverse they are![Surah IX, v. 30]
They [the Jews] spread evil in the land .... [Surah V, v. 62-66]
[The Jews] knowingly perverted [the word of Allah], know of nothing except lies ... commit evil and become engrossed in sin. [Surah II, v. 71-85]
And that to say nothing about the Hadits.
Sorry Mr. Gave...the Kosher Killer and Comic Killers are one and the same savage. Perhaps a little more research next time...
Yes, let's draw some really big conclusions from the actions of a tiny minority of extremists.