Kivaro wrote: » Not sure what's going on with the Irish Examiner today. Here is something I posted on another thread earlier: Standout headline on the Irish Examiner's viewpoint this morning:We must tackle global threat of white terror Yep, all us whities are responsible for all the world's ills. The author could have easily used this headline:We must tackle global threat of white extremist terror But nagh, white guilt must prevail on media outlets, as it reinforces the liberal/left push for uncontrolled economic migration to Western countries.
Wibbs wrote: » I keep saying that because I quoted the actual legislation back to you pointing out where it's vague and misses out entire classes of weapons. Never mind that it simply doesn't state "all semi automatic rifles are now banned(save for .22)"
Bannasidhe wrote: » You have moved the goal posts. You claimed Islamophobia didn't play a part. Now you wish me to define the ways and means it fed a murders intentions. If he had murdered 50 Jews in 2 synagogues would you quibble about whether or not Antisemitism was part of his ideological impetus? Wearing the hijab is a visual demonstration that you actively do not support Islamophobia, as well as being a display of respect. It's amazing how people can get so worked up, and judgmental, about a woman deciding of her own free will to wear a particular item on her head.
Zorya wrote: » They were not victims of Islamophobia in the west. They were victims of one murdering bastard. By all appearances they had/have very good lives in the West and have properly been shown enormous sympathy since the horrific massacre.
batgoat wrote: » They were murdered by an Islamophobic scumbag, this is a fact. There is no question about this. I can say the exact same about the victims of Breivik. They both had bloody manifestos that emphasised this fact.
batgoat wrote: » They were murdered by an Islamophobic scumbag, this is a fact. There is no question about this. I can say the exact same about the victims of Breivik. They both had bloody manifestos that emphasised this fact. Eg when a synagogue was shot up last year in the US, we rightfully called the perpetrator an anti semite.
Zorya wrote: » Was there a campaign for solidarity Kippahs to show we don't actively support anti-Semitism?
BattleCorp wrote: » http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2019/0055/latest/whole.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_arms+order_resel_25_a&p=1#LMS173647 I've read the attached order and all that does is declare what is now a military semi-automatic firearm. It's not the actual order. And I believe they have fcuked up this part of the order as the definition is wider than originally intended so we'll see what happens. Rushed legislation is not good legislation. It'll be interesting to see the actual order.
Boggles wrote: Anyway like I said when the legislation is published it will be far less vague.
Auntie Semite wrote: » Article in the Irish Examiner today suggesting what we can do to counter Islamophobiahttps://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/columnists/we-must-embrace-our-muslim-community-as-part-of-who-we-are-912330.html The author suggests that "We must turn our education system around to make Islam understood as part of what we are, part of what we have always been" Funny that, I thought most people in Ireland want the removal of religion from schools? Also I'm fairly certain Islam was never a part of what we have been "We should counter our Islamophobia by approaching Islam from our own cultural background. Most of us were schooled by Christians. Islam has the same basic values" Again I thought people wanted to move away from a religious based value system? "you can see that these three religions encode rules for functional and progressive societies which helped bring a large part of the Eurasian continent to a high level of civilisation and compassion" In Ireland the narrative is that religion created the opposite of a functional and progressive society..are we backtracking on that now? "In Ireland in 2013, when Ali Selim published a book entitled Islam and Education in Ireland calling for a “revolution” in Irish education to help Muslims feel more included, Atheist Ireland responded by saying that there was already too much time allocated to religious festivals in Irish schools" Ali Selim is an advocate for Female Genital Mutilation but I guess thats not really important is it? Not enough for the author to mention it. Maybe even a bit Islamophobic to oppose it? "Muslims affront our new secularism by being openly religious" Is she suggesting we return to religion (Islam perhaps?) in order to make Muslims feel more welcome here?
Wibbs wrote: » the order for the legislation has already been published. See BC's link above and it's even vaguer than the PM's quotes on the matter.
Hector Savage wrote: » To me it's just incredible that the same people that would be all over removing the RCC from our schools are the ones that want a return to the same system - but just a new religion attached to it. Serious cognitive dissonance
Bannasidhe wrote: » Some women in the West have decided of their own free will to wear an item of clothing that has become a symbol of Islamophobia in the West as a gesture of solidarity to victims of Islamobhobia in the West.
batgoat wrote: » Why are you dodging the fact that it was an Islamophobic attack? I do recall that the Islamic community showed plenty of solidarity with the Jewish community btw. Different scenarios are dealt with differently.
Boggles wrote: » You are getting a little caught up and bit too angry in what is essentially meaningless BS gestures. .
Zorya wrote: » I really have not. I asked you to define this ''Islamophobia'' for which all good and honest people are being asked to feel guilty about, or to show that they do not ''actively support it''. If a Synagogue is shot up, which has been done, have there been calls to the population to wear Kippahs or veils to distance themselves from their inherent anti-Semitism? If that man in Milan succeeded in torching 51 children yesterday, which he had planned to do, would he be suffering from some kind of phobia - Europhobia, childophobia, Italophobia - for which the people of Senegal, or other Muslims, must wear some item of cultural clothing to disavow their part in that ''phobia''. It's just silly. There is not this widespread ingrained Islamophobia for which ordinary people must atone. It is a word that substitutes for blasphemy really.
Zorya wrote: » The first post is the post I was responding to. The murderer may be Islamophobic, but the people shot are not ''victims of Islamophobia in the west''. They are victims of the murderer who was Islamophobic. It is different and the difference is important because it contextualises the wider response.To drive a narrative of rampant Islamophobia in the west is false and dangerous. If they were victims of a murderer who was schizophrenic we would not say they are victims of schizophrenia in the west and seek to atone generally for the existence of such in the west. I am using schizophrenia as an example of severely disordered thinking, and not as any aspersion to people who experience it.
Wibbs wrote: » +1 For example it now doesn't limit how many rounds a .22 mag can hold, nor does it mention pump action shotguns and how many they can have in their magazines. Never mind that .22LR and even .22 magnum rounds are somehow seen as OK and "safe". They don't have a lot of stopping power compared to a 9m or 7.62 no, but they can be just as deadly in the right/wrong circumstances. EG: shooting in Finland where eleven were murdered by a kid with a .22 pistol(a round fired from a pistol has lower energy compared to the same round from a longer barrelled rifle). Another Finnish example with another kid with a .22 pistol. Eight murdered. They're on a tragic roll on this one. Bobby Kennedy was murdered with a .22. I seem to recall reading the stat that the .22 kills more people than any other single calibre in the US. Now there would be a shedload more of them out there so that swings the stats. Still.
Zorya wrote: » Just think it is important not to buy into rampant Islamophobia in the west hype and etc etc
Boggles wrote: » Nobody asked you to do that. This guy was a racist cowardly scumbag who attacked and murdered 50 people primarily because of their religion. I don't see how you could need clarity on that like you have been calling for. Silly really.
Boggles wrote: » The argument that this gun kills people why ban this other gun is pretty nonsensical.
If that lad in Finland had a higher caliber more powerful weapon he probably would have killed more, one lady who was shot in the head actually survived.
Talk to any Trauma Surgeon with experience in gun shot wounds and they will explain the stark difference in being hit with different caliber bullets.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Wearing a hijab on a certain occasion such as on the one week anniversary of this appalling hate crime is to my way of thinking no different to straight people wearing rainbow badges and sporting rainbow flags in the aftermath of the homophobic murders at Pulse. It is a visual way of showing respect and rejecting the politics and ideologies of hate.
Wibbs wrote: » Which is pretty much what the NZ gov is doing. If they'd gone and banned every class of firearm but .22 bolt actions or single shot and two barrelled shotguns I'd have more respect and faith that it wasn't knee jerk grandstanding for votes.
Wibbs wrote: » And they'll also tell you the major trauma inflicted by a shotgun at close range, yet pump action shotguns are off the NZ radar, as are revolvers, lever actions etc of any calibre, instead they've the horn for "semiautomatics" because that's what the uninformed among the electorate see as the big issue.
o1s1n wrote: » Not really though and you are conflating religion (something you chose to be) with sexuality (something you are born to) Wearing a hijab in solidarity on the anniversary of this atrocity has to be the most cringe worthy, back patting things I've ever heard of. In fact I'd go so far as to say it is insulting to people who follow Islam.
Yurt! wrote: » Ali Selim is perfectly entitled proffer his views, as much as I disagree with them. The mystery is why the Irish media has annointed him and the Clonskeagh Mosque crowd as the spokespeople for Muslims in Ireland. Leo et al need to do a bit of thinking as to why they're the crowd that get the PR visits around Ramadan etc as well. It must stick in the craw of the more moderate members of the community who just want to get on with things and practice their faith in peace without being linked with Selim's regressive ramblings.
Odhinn wrote: » Who are these people? Quotes and links please.
Hector Savage wrote: » Just look at the media slant on things, and people's response. The examiner article posted has plenty of examples of this.
