French teacher killed
Comments
-
david37 said:
that islamaphobia isnt solely the preserve of the far right, those who should be despised etc.rick_chasey said:
Sorry what are you trying to say here?david37 said:
Islamaphobia is labeled far right to demonise it. The left on the other hand appear love all the bits of Islam that are anti society. Right up to the point their children are ripped apart at a concert and even then there are still the yes but comments.rick_chasey said:
Islamophobia is a feature of the far right not left is it not?Dorset_Boy said:
Why is it always only a far right dream story in your view?rick_chasey said:Far right's dream this story - makes it doubly unfortunate
I'm sure far left regimes are just as keen to clamp down on islamist extremeists.
Perhaps you need to start looking both ways, not just one all the time!
For the sake of integration and living comfortably side by side, various cultures in the west, such as lampooning religion needs to be accepted by those choosing to make their homes in western Europe.
demonising and shutting down legitimate conversation is what happens when those terms are used. eg he's homophobic. Ah i see we will ignore and silence him. you use them in that way too.
I think it's fair to ignore anyone who is islamophobic or homophobic or other *bics, to be honest. If someone's giving it "ragheads this" and "puffs that"*, then they deserve to be ignored and silenced.
*extreme, abhorrent and easy to spot examples - it's often more subtle, but the same appliesBen
Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/0 -
-
I think you're making his point for him here.Ben6899 said:david37 said:
that islamaphobia isnt solely the preserve of the far right, those who should be despised etc.rick_chasey said:
Sorry what are you trying to say here?david37 said:
Islamaphobia is labeled far right to demonise it. The left on the other hand appear love all the bits of Islam that are anti society. Right up to the point their children are ripped apart at a concert and even then there are still the yes but comments.rick_chasey said:
Islamophobia is a feature of the far right not left is it not?Dorset_Boy said:
Why is it always only a far right dream story in your view?rick_chasey said:Far right's dream this story - makes it doubly unfortunate
I'm sure far left regimes are just as keen to clamp down on islamist extremeists.
Perhaps you need to start looking both ways, not just one all the time!
For the sake of integration and living comfortably side by side, various cultures in the west, such as lampooning religion needs to be accepted by those choosing to make their homes in western Europe.
demonising and shutting down legitimate conversation is what happens when those terms are used. eg he's homophobic. Ah i see we will ignore and silence him. you use them in that way too.
I think it's fair to ignore anyone who is islamophobic or homophobic or other *bics, to be honest. If someone's giving it "ragheads this" and "puffs that"*, then they deserve to be ignored and silenced.
*extreme, abhorrent and easy to spot examples - it's often more subtle, but the same applies
0 -
nickice said:
I think you're making his point for him here.Ben6899 said:david37 said:
that islamaphobia isnt solely the preserve of the far right, those who should be despised etc.rick_chasey said:
Sorry what are you trying to say here?david37 said:
Islamaphobia is labeled far right to demonise it. The left on the other hand appear love all the bits of Islam that are anti society. Right up to the point their children are ripped apart at a concert and even then there are still the yes but comments.rick_chasey said:
Islamophobia is a feature of the far right not left is it not?Dorset_Boy said:
Why is it always only a far right dream story in your view?rick_chasey said:Far right's dream this story - makes it doubly unfortunate
I'm sure far left regimes are just as keen to clamp down on islamist extremeists.
Perhaps you need to start looking both ways, not just one all the time!
For the sake of integration and living comfortably side by side, various cultures in the west, such as lampooning religion needs to be accepted by those choosing to make their homes in western Europe.
demonising and shutting down legitimate conversation is what happens when those terms are used. eg he's homophobic. Ah i see we will ignore and silence him. you use them in that way too.
I think it's fair to ignore anyone who is islamophobic or homophobic or other *bics, to be honest. If someone's giving it "ragheads this" and "puffs that"*, then they deserve to be ignored and silenced.
*extreme, abhorrent and easy to spot examples - it's often more subtle, but the same applies
I don't really care if I'm making his point.Ben
Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/0 -
What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."0 -
Oh relax Nick. If you can’t see why this story is helpful to the far right then your loss.
I’m typing with one hand so I can’t be bothered with your semantics.
Everyone agrees it’s awful.
BB has some issues with the teaching but that’s about it0 -
And again.Ben6899 said:nickice said:
I think you're making his point for him here.Ben6899 said:david37 said:
that islamaphobia isnt solely the preserve of the far right, those who should be despised etc.rick_chasey said:
Sorry what are you trying to say here?david37 said:
Islamaphobia is labeled far right to demonise it. The left on the other hand appear love all the bits of Islam that are anti society. Right up to the point their children are ripped apart at a concert and even then there are still the yes but comments.rick_chasey said:
Islamophobia is a feature of the far right not left is it not?Dorset_Boy said:
Why is it always only a far right dream story in your view?rick_chasey said:Far right's dream this story - makes it doubly unfortunate
I'm sure far left regimes are just as keen to clamp down on islamist extremeists.
Perhaps you need to start looking both ways, not just one all the time!
For the sake of integration and living comfortably side by side, various cultures in the west, such as lampooning religion needs to be accepted by those choosing to make their homes in western Europe.
demonising and shutting down legitimate conversation is what happens when those terms are used. eg he's homophobic. Ah i see we will ignore and silence him. you use them in that way too.
I think it's fair to ignore anyone who is islamophobic or homophobic or other *bics, to be honest. If someone's giving it "ragheads this" and "puffs that"*, then they deserve to be ignored and silenced.
*extreme, abhorrent and easy to spot examples - it's often more subtle, but the same applies
I don't really care if I'm making his point.0 -
0
-
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."
1 -
Not sure the wife needs to hear all my postsbriantrumpet said:0 -
Of course, the whole point of terrorism is to get the most publicity for minimal 'outlay' - IS and the like certainly manage that, as evidenced by this case. The media love it, of course - it's drama, and hooks the viewers. The best reaction, I suppose, is a shrug, and to let law enforcement deal with it As I've said before, we're all complicit in the success of terrorism when we discuss it endlessly and consume the media's output avidly.
I know it was ridiculed at the time, but the Thatcher government's law that meant IRA interviewees had to be dubbed with actors voices did seem to reduce the broadcasters' appetite for interviewing IRA spokesmen, and terrorists' actions without the ensuing media frenzy lose their impact to a large degree. Terrorism wouldn't work without the media doing their bit.1 -
It is possible for some muslims to be victims and some to be perpetrators of crimes.nickice said:If this thread continues, the Muslim population will be the real victims in about another ten posts. The words 'racist' and 'bigot' might appear too.
I'm not sure what you're getting upset by anyway, everyone (except me and Rick in part) agrees with you, and I know my views on this type of thing are rarely popular.0 -
david37 said:
I think you're making his point for him here.
David and Nick, are you arguing that we shouldn't ignore people who are demonstrably islamo- or homophobic?Ben
Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/0 -
So they should be ignored until they've caught up?david37 said:
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."0 -
Totally agree and if anyone on here ever does start using terms like the two you mention I'm sure they"d not only be ignored but banned.Ben6899 said:david37 said:
that islamaphobia isnt solely the preserve of the far right, those who should be despised etc.rick_chasey said:
Sorry what are you trying to say here?david37 said:
Islamaphobia is labeled far right to demonise it. The left on the other hand appear love all the bits of Islam that are anti society. Right up to the point their children are ripped apart at a concert and even then there are still the yes but comments.rick_chasey said:
Islamophobia is a feature of the far right not left is it not?Dorset_Boy said:
Why is it always only a far right dream story in your view?rick_chasey said:Far right's dream this story - makes it doubly unfortunate
I'm sure far left regimes are just as keen to clamp down on islamist extremeists.
Perhaps you need to start looking both ways, not just one all the time!
For the sake of integration and living comfortably side by side, various cultures in the west, such as lampooning religion needs to be accepted by those choosing to make their homes in western Europe.
demonising and shutting down legitimate conversation is what happens when those terms are used. eg he's homophobic. Ah i see we will ignore and silence him. you use them in that way too.
I think it's fair to ignore anyone who is islamophobic or homophobic or other *bics, to be honest. If someone's giving it "ragheads this" and "puffs that"*, then they deserve to be ignored and silenced.
*extreme, abhorrent and easy to spot examples - it's often more subtle, but the same applies
However as to my knowledge nobody ever has ...[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
Yes they were extreme examples, as I conceded, but it's possible to be islamophobic and homophobic with much more subtlety.DeVlaeminck said:Totally agree and if anyone on here ever does start using terms like the two you mention I'm sure they"d not only be ignored but banned.
However as to my knowledge nobody ever has ...
You'll find examples of that, around these parts, if you look hard enough.Ben
Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/0 -
Didn't they catch-up and take a considerable lead with the invasion of Iraq?veronese68 said:
So they should be ignored until they've caught up?david37 said:
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."0 -
TheBigBean said:
Didn't they catch-up and take a considerable lead with the invasion of Iraq?veronese68 said:
So they should be ignored until they've caught up?david37 said:
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."
This piece is a long read, and obviously taking a position, but it's interesting, not least in the way it integrates the media into the calculations. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/174059004100016745150 -
You'd think, but I can't see any other eason for that post other than to justify right wing terrorism. Most odd. It's like Trump saying there are bad people on both sides as if that justifies an action.TheBigBean said:
Didn't they catch-up and take a considerable lead with the invasion of Iraq?veronese68 said:
So they should be ignored until they've caught up?david37 said:
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."0 -
Yes, you are right. The scoreboard has no relevance, and my post doesn't help.veronese68 said:
You'd think, but I can't see any other eason for that post other than to justify right wing terrorism. Most odd. It's like Trump saying there are bad people on both sides as if that justifies an action.TheBigBean said:
Didn't they catch-up and take a considerable lead with the invasion of Iraq?veronese68 said:
So they should be ignored until they've caught up?david37 said:
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."0 -
TheBigBean said:
Yes, you are right. The scoreboard has no relevance, and my post doesn't help.veronese68 said:
You'd think, but I can't see any other eason for that post other than to justify right wing terrorism. Most odd. It's like Trump saying there are bad people on both sides as if that justifies an action.TheBigBean said:
Didn't they catch-up and take a considerable lead with the invasion of Iraq?veronese68 said:
So they should be ignored until they've caught up?david37 said:
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."
I took your post as being somewhat satirical, hence my link to that very relevant piece.0 -
The devil is in the detail. It all depends what you consider the threshold to be. If someone says 'all gays must die' they can be safely ignored whereas if someone doesn't believe in gay marriage I wouldn't ignore them as, though it's not my personal opinion, I don't consider it homophobic. Especially as it was the majority opinion until not so long ago.Ben6899 said:david37 said:I think you're making his point for him here.
David and Nick, are you arguing that we shouldn't ignore people who are demonstrably islamo- or homophobic?1 -
I just think you should be more precise in what you say. It appeared that you were saying free speech and cancel culture was something that only concerned the far right. In fact, that's what you did say.rick_chasey said:Oh relax Nick. If you can’t see why this story is helpful to the far right then your loss.
I’m typing with one hand so I can’t be bothered with your semantics.
Everyone agrees it’s awful.
BB has some issues with the teaching but that’s about it
I don't think there is any doubt that this will fuel the far right but that's way down my list of concerns right now/0 -
"Ignored", as in reported to the police...nickice said:
The devil is in the detail. It all depends what you consider the threshold to be. If someone says 'all gays must die' they can be safely ignored whereas if someone doesn't believe in gay marriage I wouldn't ignore them as, though it's not my personal opinion, I don't consider it homophobic. Especially as it was the majority opinion until not so long ago.Ben6899 said:david37 said:I think you're making his point for him here.
David and Nick, are you arguing that we shouldn't ignore people who are demonstrably islamo- or homophobic?0 -
I didn't say it wasn't. It was a remark on the fact that whenever there is an Islamic terror attack, the conversation eventually turns to the worry of a (usually non-existent) backlash.TheBigBean said:
It is possible for some muslims to be victims and some to be perpetrators of crimes.nickice said:If this thread continues, the Muslim population will be the real victims in about another ten posts. The words 'racist' and 'bigot' might appear too.
I'm not sure what you're getting upset by anyway, everyone (except me and Rick in part) agrees with you, and I know my views on this type of thing are rarely popular.0 -
Unfortunately it was a bit long and didn't have an obvious summary, so I didn't read it.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Yes, you are right. The scoreboard has no relevance, and my post doesn't help.veronese68 said:
You'd think, but I can't see any other eason for that post other than to justify right wing terrorism. Most odd. It's like Trump saying there are bad people on both sides as if that justifies an action.TheBigBean said:
Didn't they catch-up and take a considerable lead with the invasion of Iraq?veronese68 said:
So they should be ignored until they've caught up?david37 said:
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."
I took your post as being somewhat satirical, hence my link to that very relevant piece.0 -
I thought your post was the kind of tongue in cheek post I would make, normally beneath you I'd have thought.TheBigBean said:
Yes, you are right. The scoreboard has no relevance, and my post doesn't help.veronese68 said:
You'd think, but I can't see any other eason for that post other than to justify right wing terrorism. Most odd. It's like Trump saying there are bad people on both sides as if that justifies an action.TheBigBean said:
Didn't they catch-up and take a considerable lead with the invasion of Iraq?veronese68 said:
So they should be ignored until they've caught up?david37 said:
I think if you look at the numbers of people killed by muslims in the US in the last twenty years, right wing groups have some way to go before they reach the 2996 killed on Sept 11 alone.briantrumpet said:What type of terrorism people choose to focus on can be revealing, as with the US: as has been pointed out, Trump's ignoring of white supremacist terrorism and singling out any crimes by Muslims, despite the evidence of WS terrorism being far more prevalent, tells you that it's not the terrorism per se that troubles Trump, just who's doing it.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
"Right-wing attacks and plots were predominant from 1994 to 1999 and accounted for more than half of all incidents in 2008 as well as every year since 2011, with the exception of 2013. Most right-wing attacks in the 1990s targeted abortion clinics, while most right-wing attacks since 2014 focused on individuals (often targeted because of religion, race, or ethnicity) and religious institutions. Facilities and individuals related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups."
Mr Trumpet's link is rather long but I've saved it to read later.0 -
yes that is what Im saying. I understand the no platforming cancel mentality but its self defeating. throughout history we have groups who's views are at either extreme and who have no tolerance. And with no tolerance there can be no education or understanding of other views.Ben6899 said:david37 said:I think you're making his point for him here.
David and Nick, are you arguing that we shouldn't ignore people who are demonstrably islamo- or homophobic?
Now given most people either dont or cant think for themselves and tend to follow norms given to them by other people following norms, total isolation from other viewpoints just leads to misunderstanding and stagnation.
the other side of course is we ignore those islamists seeking to introduce sharia and a caliphate. turn a blind eye . Like in Rotherham perhaps.
0 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMcoNVSUae8
Nabila Ramdani doesn't want blasphemy laws but wants depictions of Mohammed to be banned. Remember what I said about saying that Muslims are the real victims. Perfect example here.
1
