you could do this and risk the infraction, rather than the passive aggressive digs I guess :shrug:

People are suspicious of Muslims because, although not all Muslims are terrorists, all terrorists are Muslim... at least the ones wreaking havoc on the west are. But we don't know which ones, and that's the crux of it. So we're pretty much suspicious of all of them. That doesn't mean people don't recognise quite clearly that IS and their like kill more Muslims than non-Muslims.

Why do I need protecting, I am not abusing Muslims and I am not promoting any kind of abuse towards anyone. You constantly accusing anyone who exercises their right to an opinon in their criticism of Islam as ‘being full of hate’ does a pretty good job though.

That almost sounds like some kind of disguised threat. So you would do what exactly if I dared express my opinion on a misogynistic religion on another site - try to deny me my opinions and shout me down with abuse. Good one. :rolleyes:

Oh come on, you come over as one of the most passive aggressive people on here.

Oh dear Livia, you used the word 'we'... collective was it?!

What has this got to do with what I said. You said "Rather like the PC brigade are conveniently turning a blind eye to the obvious subjugation of Muslim women in Britain (despite trying to convince us all that it is free choice, who the hell do they think they are trying to kid- only themselves maybe to conveniently fit in with their political beliefs) as they walk around covering themselves from head to toe, in their shame for being women, in the HERE and NOW."

Which suggests that any of us who stands up to a Muslim womans rights is doing it because they are being PC. I said (though not my exact words) you can say that about people like its a 'real' thing simply because you believe its a 'real' thing, but its not a real thing, its Brillo propaganda.

What I get from your thinking is, you believe everyone is disgusted with the subjugation of Muslim women who are (in your mind) forced into wearing the veil and those who speak out against people like you feel the same as you do but fight against you because of PC. In other words you are calling me...indirectly, a fake and I take issue with that.

Let me be clear about this none existent disguised threat. If I was on a none PC forum and you said that, I would of come back at you with some very insulting words but I'm not so I can't.

I'm not the one pointing out, ooo I would tear you a new one if I was on a different site, just get on with it if that is what you want to do :umm2: no one is going to take you out and shoot you, the worst that will happen is you will get an infraction, but carry on bringing it back to me, and if I want to say something I will say it I don't need to hide under the guise that on another site I would make a different point :hee:

what a nasty and personal thing to say

:bored:

Cherie is one of the most reasonable posters on here whilst at the same time having the courage to stand her ground. An admirable poster.

Thank you both, now we better get back to the point or Niamh will take us out..literally :omgno:

On the actual subject, men did dress in the burkha to murder poor innocents, so we know it can happen.:shrug:
Perhaps if the face can be shown in public places it would suffice.

That's the problem, isn't it. Only a small percentage of Muslims are fundamentalists, but we have no way, as the general public, to identify which ones are. And IS and Hezbollah etc. have no worries about using women and children as human shields so surely Muslims can understand why people are concerned that a section of the public, the section of the public with the most terrorists at the moment, are allowed to walk around incognito. You see women in burkas in banks... motorcyclists are asked to remove their helmets, though. It makes no sense.

Yep,I don’t think face coverings should be allowed in public buildings just as helmets like you say.

Also this idea that criticising Islam is ‘Islamaphobic’ is just a lefty shutdown tactic.
Islamaphobia is a ridiculous word anyway.
People can criticise any religion they like for now.
And it’s little wonder why there’s so much female oppression in Islam when many muslims hang on every word of a prophet who used to beat his 9 year old wife.
Islam needs criticism.So do other religions but other religions are’nt as much of a problem now or taken so literally by the majority of followers.

Let's call it what it is then... Anti-semitism

So it’s anti-semitic to criticise a religion?

The day that becomes a law then we know we’re in John McDonell’s cosy little authoritarian nightmare

Obviously it depends on the context.

There's nothing wrong with criticism so long as its not constant. When it becomes focussed and constant on just one religeon then it could be seen as anti-semitic.

Someone apparently looked it up, DR I think, and informed us all, after Islamophobia had been called out for what it is - a non-word, that the real word was anti-Semitic. :hehe:

I’d say anti-semitism is hating a people because of a combination of their religion and race just as racism is hating a people because of their skin colour or race.

Criticising a religion or even the actions of followers of that religion imo doesn’t constitute(and should’nt).

Most rational people don’t hate Muslims or Christians or Jews because they choose to follow a religion.They judge people as they find them on an individual basis.
They do criticise aspects of their religion.Especially the current most oppressive and dangerous religion we are encountering.

Not imo.I’d say that hating people because of their religion is anti-semitism.

Doesn’t that depend on what they are saying and whether it is true. If someone says it is a misogynistic religion, that would not be a spurious lie and such a religion is then open for criticism. Who gets to decide how much is constant - you it seems.

An couple of examples. Before WW2 and as the Nazi party were forming, a general distaste for Jewish people started to spread throughout Germany. This of course was prompted through propaganda media channels and radio. Was there a stirring of anti-semitism and if not why not?

More recently we've been the spectators of war in the Middle East by both tribal natives and the West. We then started to see terrorist attacks on our own shores and suddenly we were all talking about Muslims. Every day for years we have had something in one paper or other condemning the Islamic faith and on every political forum we've had many debates about the sinfulness of Islam. Is that a stirring up of anti-semitism? and if not why not?

What is this new and interesting use of the phrase anti-Semitism?

Because before WW2 the Jews were not bombing the citizens of Germany, cutting off their heads, capturing women for rape and sex slavery etc. etc. etc. Hut hey, nice try in comparing the Muslim situation with the Holocaust. I'd laugh if I didn't think you were serious.

You answered it yourself

1.Yes obviously because “a general distaste for Jewish people“

2.No because “condemning the Islamic faith“

Is it any different to how everyone was talking about the IRA in the 90s, Muslims lived in the UK then as well but they weren't talked about. there was plenty anti Irish rhetoric in the DM though, its just what is relevant at the time, there was no name for anti Irish rhetoric either :idc:

Just use anti-Semitism, Cherie, seems it's now a catch-all phrase.

I appreciate it is predominantly used to cover slights aimed at anything related to the Jewish and/or the Jewish faith... but why?
If Islamophobia is not acceptable as an umbrella term and Muslims are by definition Semites where's the issue?

I think the concerns by many about the aforementioned terrorism and hate-speeches/threats made on our streets from many of said religion as well as how we see women and others treated over-seas and here in the name of said religion puts a different slant on it not surprisingly.

It’s a completely different scenario to what the Nazis did to the Jewish people.

You know why. Although it would be useful for Labour supporters who refuse to believe their own party is anti-Semitic. Now apparently, the term will cover Muslims. Which is interesting... Because Semitism was born waaaaaay before Islam. Islam is less than 2000 years old and Judaism over 5000 years old. But hey, if it suits your particular agenda, then go for it.

:thumbs:

seems to be


I think I will make up my own

Paddyphobia

Opinionphobia.

I don't that's why I'm asking..

Ignore for a second if you can any Labour slurs

'The three main Semitic religions are. Christianity, Judaism and Islam.'

How can one be more 'Semitic' than the other?

Criticizing the religion of islam shouldn't need a special term, because in its current manifestation and the effects it has on the world, there is plenty to criticize.

Yes, of course it depends on if its true but most of what is said come with grains of propaganda nonsense.

You know, the Muslim faith was never a thing until the troubles started. Nobody cared about Muslims being misogynists, just as nobody still cares about Jews being misogynist and you know why? because most Muslim men are not misogynists and most Jewish men are not misogynists. That doesn't mean misogyny doesn't exist in both the Jewish and Muslim communities, it just means its not wide spread.

You stereotype an entire religion. If we were to do the same about Jews there would be absolute outrage and rightly so. Me though, I'm equally outraged for the stereotyping of either.

I'm not talking about what the Nazis did to the Jewish people. I was talking about the rise of the Nazi party before the holocaust began. I was talking about how Jewish people were demonized and subjugated, not only by the rising Nazi party but by the German people.