It seems that the 'Blasphemy Law' could affect Boards

Nodin

gaynorvader wrote: »

Your posts taken as a whole seem to be racist. Why do you keep constantly bringing up acts of racism only against Muslims? There's plenty of other racism in the world.

Indeed. Anti-Semitism, for instance.

28064212

Mark Hamill wrote: »

1. "not eating sprouts" can manifest itself through hatred (of sprouts)
2. Hatred breeds hatred
3. Hatred can lead to violence up to and including murder.

Therefore, people who hate sprouts, are murders?

Ah, you missed the really obvious one, that has been involved in far more hatred and murders than blasphemy. Or even brussel sprouts:

1. Religion can manifest itself...

Turtwig

28064212 wrote: »

Ah, you missed the really obvious one, that has been involved in far more hatred and murders than blasphemy. Or even brussel sprouts:

1. Religion can manifest itself...

Oh noes! You're pandering to the stereotype that encourages blashphemy which encourages hatred. . .

gaynorvader

Jernal wrote: »

Oh noes! You're pandering to the stereotype that encourages blashphemy which encourages hatred. . .

I hate hatred.

28064212

gaynorvader wrote: »

I hate hatred.

1. Hatred can manifest itself...

mcmoustache

Nodin wrote: »

Indeed. Anti-Semitism, for instance.

That gave me a good laugh! I haven't visited the CT forum in ages and almost forgot about all that anti-jew stuff.

Maybe there's a connection. Some sort of "my enemy's enemy is my friend" type stuff.

Gordon

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Don't speak for me please. I know and what you now can know is that he was a Muslim.

Racism is part of Islamophobia. People are targetted because they "appear" Muslim. For example this Gap advertisement was recently vandalised with anti-Muslim graffiti even though it featured a Sikh fashion designer.

That image doesn't mention Islam or Muslims, is there a reason why you think it's targeting a particular Islamic religion or have I missed something? Is it simply because of the word 'bomb'? It's a sad state of existence whereby a religion is widely attached to an extremely negative connotation (but highly usual for many religions), so it's surprising that people want to reinforce these negative connotations, and spread them further into regular speech and existence. For example, Brown Bomber, your username could be considered by some as that very reinforcement. Which is surprising, and quite strange.

Sarky

I brought that up with him/her once before. Apparently that's completely different altogether.

Brown Bomber

Nodin wrote: »

Nobody here defends stereotyping. Either provide quotes or stop the nonsense please.

Rubbish.

In tthe cartoon thread alone Muslims or Mohammed were stereotyped as being, violent, irrational, dirty, sexual deviants or otherwise foriegn and different creatures.

And why was this innocent Muslim man brutally murderered by his white neighbours? That's right... they has thought of him as being a sexual deviant.

Delirium

Unless they mob held the opinion that all Muslims are child molesters, I fail to see what him being Muslim has to do with the events

Heck, even the wording of your own post suggests it's racism that was the motive.

28064212

Brown Bomber wrote: »

In tthe cartoon thread alone Muslims or Mohammed were stereotyped as being, violent, irrational, dirty, sexual deviants or otherwise foriegn and different creatures.

An individual can't be stereotyped, that doesn't make any sense.

Which posts exactly stereotyped the Muslim people?

Brown Bomber

28064212 wrote: »

An individual can't be stereotyped, that doesn't make any sense.

Which posts exactly stereotyped the Muslim people?

The "S" at the end of "Muslims" makes it a plural i.e. not an "individual",

Brown Bomber

koth wrote: »

people are targetted because they look Muslim, and yet a as you point out, it was a Sikh in the fashion designer.

So some knuckle-dragging racists have a problem with middle-Eastern people and it's somehow Islamophobia?

No, not "somehow". If they have a problem with Middle-Eastern people because they perceive them to be Muslim based on their physical appearance then it is obviously Islamophobia combined with a form of racism. Pointless getting too bogged down in labels though; hatred is hatred.

koth wrote: »

Outlawing blasphemy will have no tangible impact on those sort of people.

I disagree. Blasphemy can reinforce and inflame prejudice against religious minorties.

koth wrote: »

If all Muslims that aren't white were Christian, you can be guaranteed the racists would still target them. .

I am am afraid you are wrong. Take Breivik for example, he was anti-racist.
[QUOTE=koth;87759953I really don't understand how someone who engages in blasphemy can be considered to be comparable to a racist.[/QUOTE]

I'll allow the family of the murdered Muslim to explain then,

"Call it racism, call it prejudice, it doesn't really matter what you call it, the things our brother was subjected to were barbaric.

Read more: http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Bijan-kind-man-Murdered-Bristol-man-s-family/story-20236460-detail

/story.html#ixzz2m7zfFDlL

28064212

Brown Bomber wrote: »

The "S" at the end of "Muslims" makes it a plural i.e. not an "individual",

Is there an "S" at the end of Mohammed?

Brown Bomber

Gordon wrote: »

That image doesn't mention Islam or Muslims, is there a reason why you think it's targeting a particular Islamic religion or have I missed something? Is it simply because of the word 'bomb'? It's a sad state of existence whereby a religion is widely attached to an extremely negative connotation (but highly usual for many religions), so it's surprising that people want to reinforce these negative connotations, and spread them further into regular speech and existence. For example, Brown Bomber, your username could be considered by some as that very reinforcement. Which is surprising, and quite strange.

This innocent American-Sikh was murdered in a hate-crime for being a "Muslim" terrorist sympathiser by a non-Muslim .



Can you recognise any similarites?

Bannasidhe

Brown Bomber.

I am really struggling to see what this has to do with any notions about Blasphemy of any kind.

It was a brutal, hate filled act - yes.
It was more than likely racially motivated.
It was fed by the current hysteria over child abuse.

But blasphemy - No.

I also think it is extremely tasteless, insensitive and cynical for you to use the tragic death of Bijan Ebrahimi at the hands of racist idiots to further your own agenda.

Delirium

Brown Bomber wrote: »

No, not "somehow". If they have a problem with Middle-Eastern people because they perceive them to be Muslim based on their physical appearance then it is obviously Islamophobia combined with a form of racism. Pointless getting too bogged down in labels though; hatred is hatred.

It's not pointless when you're suggesting that it's Islamophobia yet there's an obvious racist attitude.

I disagree. Blasphemy can reinforce and inflame prejudice against religious minorties.

How? "Allah/God/Jesus doesn't exist" is going to inflame hatred against a religious group?

I am am afraid you are wrong. Take Breivik for example, he was anti-racist.

How am I wrong? you posted an example where a poster with a Sikh in it was defaced. That surely is some sort of proof that it's racism rather than blasphemy that's at the root of that bigotry/racism.

I'll allow the family of the murdered Muslim to explain then,

Nothing in that traigc story points to any relation to blasphemy, just racism.

smacl

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I am really struggling to see what this has to do with any notions about Blasphemy of any kind.

Exactly. Xenophobia and racist hate crimes are not the same as blasphemy. The first is a direct attack on people, the second is contradicting an institutionalized belief system. Cartoons that lampoon dead or mythological figures are in no way the same as attacking someone because they look or behave differently to you.

Sarky

Brown Bomber needs us all to be racist bigots, therefore we are. That's how it works, you see.

Gordon

Brown Bomber wrote: »

This innocent American-Sikh was murdered in a hate-crime for being a "Muslim" terrorist sympathiser by a non-Muslim .



Can you recognise any similarites?

You ignoring and dodging my comment is rather unsurprising. And still, more will see your username as spreading such negativity further.

Turtwig

Gordon wrote: »

You ignoring and dodging my comment is rather unsurprising. And still, more will see your username as spreading such negativity further.

Isn't his user name after a boxer?

Gordon

Jernal wrote: »

Isn't his user name after a boxer?

Is it? Perhaps Brown Bomber can muster the reasoning behind their name, but I imagine they will dodge again.

Gordon

Brown Bomber wrote: »

This innocent American-Sikh was murdered in a hate-crime for being a "Muslim" terrorist sympathiser by a non-Muslim .

Also, the male Sikh in the advert that was defaced isn't dead, I've no idea where you pulled that one from. Or are you talking about the Iranian guy that was murdered for being a suspected paedophile?

Brown Bomber

Gordon wrote: »

Is it? Perhaps Brown Bomber can muster the reasoning behind their name, but I imagine they will dodge again.

http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/9179/10513087_1.jpg?v=8CDCDA889686CF0

Brown Bomber

Gordon wrote: »

Also, the male Sikh in the advert that was defaced isn't dead, I've no idea where you pulled that one from. Or are you talking about the Iranian guy that was murdered for being a suspected paedophile?

I never said they were the same person. The Sikh in the second picture was gunned down and killed for being Muslim by a non-Muslim when Muslim = terrorist. I asked you if you could see the undeniable similarities between his image and the caricature of Muhammed as a terrorist?

Gordon

I had a girlfriend that used to dodge questions by offering responses that wouldn't answer a direct question, but instead imply an answer. I learned quickly what they really meant simply by the fact that they offered a potential answer disguised as an answer.

Brown Bomber

smacl wrote: »

Exactly. Xenophobia and racist hate crimes are not the same as blasphemy. The first is a direct attack on people, the second is contradicting an institutionalized belief system. Cartoons that lampoon dead or mythological figures are in no way the same as attacking someone because they look or behave differently to you.

... except when you are attacking someone because they look or behave differently to you through blasphemous material which reinforces bigoted stereotypes about an entire group.

.

Gordon

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I never said they were the same person. The Sikh in the second picture was gunned down and killed for being Muslim by a non-Muslim when Muslim = terrorist.

The second image that you posted (the one after the Sikh model) was the cartoon of a guy wearing a bomb on his head. You'll need to quote the second Sikh that you mentioned.

So you're saying that you completely ignored my question and comment about the Sikh model in the poster, and instead offered up something else to discuss, is that what you're saying?

mcmoustache

I'm lost.

I thought blasphemy was one thing and that assault and murder were something else.

Then I saw this thread about blasphemy and it's full of stories of racism, bigotry, assault and death.

Either the thread has gone very OT or there's some serious muddying of the waters going on.

Brown Bomber

Gordon wrote: »

The second image that you posted (the one after the Sikh model) was the cartoon of a guy wearing a bomb on his head. You'll need to quote the second Sikh that you mentioned.

So you're saying that you completely ignored my question and comment about the Sikh model in the poster, and instead offered up something else to discuss, is that what you're saying?

No. You seemed confused about how someone defacing an image with a Sikh by changing "make love" to "make bombs" could be considered Islamophobic. I then showed you an image of an innocent Sikh man who was killed for "looking Muslim", who looked remarkably similar to the infamous Jyllands-Posten cartoon to prove to you the existence of anti-Muslim hate crimes committed against Sikhs.

These are just two of many.


Murdered gas station owner


Fashion Designer


Clearly two different people. Not sure how you couldn't tell them apart...

Bannasidhe

Brown Bomber wrote: »

No. You seemed confused about how someone defacing an image with a Sikh by changing "make love" to "make bombs" could be considered Islamophobic. I then showed you an image of an innocent Sikh man who was killed for "looking Muslim", who looked remarkably similar to the infamous Jyllands-Posten cartoon to prove to you the existence of anti-Muslim hate crimes committed against Sikhs.

These are just two of many.


Murdered gas station owner


Fashion Designer


Clearly two different people. Not sure how you couldn't tell them apart...

Still not blasphemy.

Were the actions of the Shankill Butchers blasphemy? NO.

Were the Warrington Bombers guilty of blasphemy? NO.

The Shankill Butchers were vile, Sectarian, murdering psychos - not blasphemers.

All I see here is you continuing to use tragic deaths to further some agenda of your own.

The Warrington Bombers were vile, Sectarian, murdering psychos - not blasphemers.

28064212

Muhammed was not a prophet - is blasphemy, is not hatred
All Muslims are murderers - is not blasphemy, is hatred

You seem to have difficulty with this concept

Nodin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Rubbish.

In tthe cartoon thread alone Muslims or Mohammed were stereotyped as being, violent, irrational, dirty, sexual deviants or otherwise foriegn and different creatures.
..................

Dishonesty is a nasty thing. Who was being satirised? It wasn't muslims, I can tell you that now.

Gordon

Brown Bomber wrote: »

No. You seemed confused about how someone defacing an image with a Sikh by changing "make love" to "make bombs" could be considered Islamophobic. I then showed you an image of an innocent Sikh man who was killed for "looking Muslim", who looked remarkably similar to the infamous Jyllands-Posten cartoon to prove to you the existence of anti-Muslim hate crimes committed against Sikhs.

You'll need to fix your second Sikh's image, as it doesn't show on any browser I use.

So you have basically completely dodged all of my questions then. Ah well, I should lower my expectations from now on.

Brown Bomber

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Still not blasphemy.

Going to explain this one last time...

I never said any of your examples were blasphemous. What I have said negative stereotypes about religious groups can be expressed through blasphemous material. These stereotypes reinforce hatred and prejudices which can lead to innocent people being the victims of hate crimes up to and including murder.

The Muhammed with a bomb caricature in his turban is a good example as Sikhs who resemble the caricature and resemble the "Muslim" stereotype in appearance have been attack for being Muslim.

Gordon

Brown Bomber wrote: »

What I have said negative stereotypes about religious groups can be expressed through..

..discussion forum usernames.

Brown Bomber

Nodin wrote: »

Dishonesty is a nasty thing. Who was being satirised? It wasn't muslims, I can tell you that now.

Really?

Can you point out Muhammed in this image which was posted in that thread?

Gordon

And I raise your question with another question.

Brown Bomber

Gordon wrote: »

You'll need to fix your second Sikh's image, as it doesn't show on any browser I use.

So you have basically completely dodged all of my questions then. Ah well, I should lower my expectations from now on.

I am not intentionally dodging anything. You speak in a rather intellectual manner which I have trouble understanding. What specifically do you want me to answer?

Nodin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Going to explain this one last time...

I never said any of your examples were blasphemous. What I have said negative stereotypes about religious groups can be expressed through blasphemous material. These stereotypes reinforce hatred and prejudices which can lead to innocent people being the victims of hate crimes up to and including murder.

.

Perpetuating negative stereotypes, eh?

" I have no doubt that you mean well. I am just pointing out that denying the massively disproportionate influence of Jews worldwide is delusional, doubly so to ascribe antisemitism based on facts"
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87192256&postcount=2018

Nodin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Really?

Can you point out Muhammed in this image which was posted in that thread?

Guy satirising the ones that threatened him......


How long ago was that thread, and you're still crapping on about it?

Brown Bomber

Nodin wrote: »

Perpetuating negative stereotypes, eh?

" I have no doubt that you mean well. I am just pointing out that denying the massively disproportionate influence of Jews worldwide is delusional, doubly so to ascribe antisemitism based on facts"
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87192256&postcount=2018

Haven't we been down this road before? And weren't you left with your tail between your legs? Have you found Muhammed in that cartoon yet? Hint: he's not there, it's a violent Muslim committing murdrer instead.

Bannasidhe

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Going to explain this one last time...

I never said any of your examples were blasphemous. What I have said negative stereotypes about religious groups can be expressed through blasphemous material. These stereotypes reinforce hatred and prejudices which can lead to innocent people being the victims of hate crimes up to and including murder.

The Muhammed with a bomb caricature in his turban is a good example as Sikhs who resemble the caricature and resemble the "Muslim" stereotype in appearance have been attack for being Muslim.

Then why are you discussing them in a thread entitled 'It seems that the 'Blasphemy Law' could affect Boards'????

Your explanation simply doesn't stand up - If I say 'I do not believe Jesus Christ was the Messiah' - that would be considered blasphemous by Christians. However - it takes some stretch of the imagination to suggest what I mean is - I hate Christians.

Were I to say to Muslim friends 'I do not believe Muhommad was a prophet of God' - I don't think they would be surprised as if I did believe that I would most likely be Muslim. While some might say that technically what I said was blasphemy - not even the most ardent believer would try and claim that this was the same thing as my advocating any kind of hate crime.

The fact that some morons cannot tell the difference between a Sikh and a Muslim is not blasphemous - it is ignorance.

By the by - have you tried to run this latest piece of s*it stirring up the flag pole in the Islam forum?

Nodin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Haven't we been down this road before? .

I don't believe so.

Why is it not ok to satirise muhammed but ok to repeat age old anti-Semitic remarks?

Gordon

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I am not intentionally dodging anything. You speak in a rather intellectual manner which I have trouble understanding. What specifically do you want me to answer?

The sentences that I have written containing question marks.

(weird, those Sikh images are appearing now!)

Nodin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

............
The Muhammed with a bomb caricature in his turban is a good example as Sikhs who resemble the caricature and resemble the "Muslim" stereotype in appearance have been attack for being Muslim.

The Sikh gas station owner was killed in 2001.

The cartoon came out in 2005.

Pull the other one.

Brown Bomber

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Then why are you discussing them in a thread entitled 'It seems that the 'Blasphemy Law' could affect Boards'????

and again: . What I have said negative stereotypes about religious groups can be expressed through blasphemous material. These stereotypes reinforce hatred and prejudices which can lead to innocent people being the victims of hate crimes up to and including murder.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

TYour explanation simply doesn't stand up - If I say 'I do not believe Jesus Christ was the Messiah' - that would be considered blasphemous by Christians. However - it takes some stretch of the imagination to suggest what I mean is - I hate Christians.

Were I to say to Muslim friends 'I do not believe Muhommad was a prophet of God' - I don't think they would be surprised as if I did believe that I would most likely be Muslim. While some might say that technically what I said was blasphemy - not even the most ardent believer would try and claim that this was the same thing as my advocating any kind of hate crime.

The fact that some morons cannot tell the difference between a Sikh and a Muslim is not blasphemous - it is ignorance.

I have no issue at all with the kinds of blasphemy you speak of. What I have a problem with is blasphemous material that stereotypes religious minorities, a consequence of which can be hate crimes.

Brown Bomber

Gordon wrote: »

The sentences that I have written containing question marks.

(weird, those Sikh images are appearing now!)

... could you please be more specific?

I geam trying to answer your questions (at least the ones that aren't based on your own misundertandings of the two different Sikhs and my username).

Brown Bomber

Nodin wrote: »

The Sikh gas station owner was killed in 2001.

The cartoon came out in 2005.

Pull the other one.

Right, and the stereotype of the violent, bearded and turbaned Muslim was non-existent before 2005?

Like I said these stereotypes REINFORCE prejudices.

Brown Bomber

Nodin wrote: »

I don't believe so.

Why is it not ok to satirise muhammed but ok to repeat age old anti-Semitic remarks?

What in that post was anti-semitic?

Was it when I said this?

The Jewish people on the whole I would say have a greater net positive effect on the world than any other