Elon Musk

[hypochondriac]

21 minutes ago, egg said:

Discrimination is discrimination. The title is just that. If someone is discriminating by skin colour they're racist. If they're discriminating a Jew then they are anti semitic and probably racist. If they're discriminating a Muslim then they're Islamaphobic and probably racist. If the probably part is wrongly attributed, it makes no difference to the presence of the actual prejudice. 

Streeting - https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/15/islamophobia-racism-definition-free-speech-theresa-may

Baddiel re Anti semitism/racism -https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/david-baddiel-whoopi-goldberg-antisemitism-holocaust-the-view-b980696.html

I also read an article in I think the Jewish chronicle on the issue.

I'm with you re wiki as such being an authority, but the scholars who express a view are no less of an authority than Baddiel or Streeting. Here's the link if you have a change of heart - under the racism heading -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia#:~:text=Several scholars consider Islamophobia to,Turkic and anti-Arab racism

Thanks. So the definition that Streeting is talking about is "expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness." What is that? The recent MP who stood up in Parliament wanted desecration of the Qaran to be made illegal. Would that be Islamophobic? I can see why that would meet the definition of perceived Muslimness. 

The other reason it matters is because the charge of stirring up religious hatred is currently lower in this country than stirring up racial hatred since to secure a prosecution currently you have to show that what someone did was likely to stir up religious hatred and that they intended to do so. It's a very clear distinction that matters so yes types of discrimination and how they are categorised matters quite a bit. 

[egg]

13 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Thanks. So the definition that Streeting is talking about is "expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness." What is that? The recent MP who stood up in Parliament wanted desecration of the Qaran to be made illegal. Would that be Islamophobic? I can see why that would meet the definition of perceived Muslimness. 

The other reason it matters is because the charge of stirring up religious hatred is currently lower in this country than stirring up racial hatred since to secure a prosecution currently you have to show that what someone did was likely to stir up religious hatred and that they intended to do so. It's a very clear distinction that matters so yes types of discrimination and how they are categorised matters quite a bit. 

We'll have to agree to differ on this. Islamaphobia is a thing, anti semitism is a thing, racism is a thing. They're all unacceptable.

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

We'll have to agree to differ on this. Islamaphobia is a thing, anti semitism is a thing, racism is a thing. They're all unacceptable.

Like I said it matters if Islamophobia is viewed as racist because it has an impact on prosecutions and sentencing so it's important that it's correct. Regarding it being a thing, we'd have to agree on some definition of it in order to agree that. Definitions using Muslimness or perceived Muslimness isn't acceptable in my opinion and is deeply problematic and also hasn't yet been accepted in law anyway as far as I'm aware. 

[egg]

20 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Like I said it matters if Islamophobia is viewed as racist because it has an impact on prosecutions and sentencing so it's important that it's correct. Regarding it being a thing, we'd have to agree on some definition of it in order to agree that. Definitions using Muslimness or perceived Muslimness isn't acceptable in my opinion and is deeply problematic and also hasn't yet been accepted in law anyway as far as I'm aware. 

The criminal context is one approach to definition, and as you've read, there are others. For the purposes of the discussion,  I repeat that I couldn't care less whether Islamaphobia amounts to racism, but to mind (and many others) it is. 

I see you liked that video which tried to argue that Islamaphobia isn't a thing. I know that you recognise anti semitism as a thing, so I assume that you similarly agree that Islamaphobia is a thing (regardless of whether it's racism)? 

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, egg said:

The criminal context is one approach to definition, and as you've read, there are others. For the purposes of the discussion,  I repeat that I couldn't care less whether Islamaphobia amounts to racism, but to mind (and many others) it is. 

I see you liked that video which tried to argue that Islamaphobia isn't a thing. I know that you recognise anti semitism as a thing, so I assume that you similarly agree that Islamaphobia is a thing (regardless of whether it's racism)? 

I'll repeat, I can only agree that something is a thing if there's a definition of that thing that I can agree is reasonable. If there is a fair and reasonable definition that doesn't involve talk of Muslimness then I'll have a look.

I do have more than a sneaking suspicion that some parties seek to use a broad definition and wooly wording about Muslimness in order to dampen criticisms of Islam itself (this isn't some unfounded fear given the MP from the other week) and is the same fear about including trans in the conversion therapy ban with fears that doctors will feel threatened for questioning someone's feelings. 

Laws that seek to prevent open discrimination or hostility towards someone because of their religion or to prevent abuse against people in the name of converting them from whatever perceived problem they have are clearly desirable and reasonable. The big problem is that badly worded laws have unintended consequences and the road to hell is paved with good intentions. 

Edited Friday at 19:46 by hypochondriac

[Holmes_and_Watson]

49 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'll repeat, I can only agree that something is a thing if there's a definition of that thing that I can agree is reasonable. If there is a fair and reasonable definition that doesn't involve talk of Muslimness then I'll have a look.

I do have more than a sneaking suspicion that some parties seek to use a broad definition and wooly wording about Muslimness in order to dampen criticisms of Islam itself (this isn't some unfounded fear given the MP from the other week) and is the same fear about including trans in the conversion therapy ban with fears that doctors will feel threatened for questioning someone's feelings. 

Laws that seek to prevent open discrimination or hostility towards someone because of their religion or to prevent abuse against people in the name of converting them from whatever perceived problem they have are clearly desirable and reasonable. The big problem is that badly worded laws have unintended consequences and the road to hell is paved with good intentions. 

The first site that came up was the Muslim Council of Britain.

So, little caveat that this is just regarding definition and not regarding reasons for governments/others to cut ties with them.

They mention the All party group "Muslimness", but then helpfully give more depth to it as follows:-

What Islamophobia is
In 2019, the All Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims proposed the following definition: ‘Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.’ Drawing on analysis published since 2019, the Muslim of Council of Britain’s report sets out core conceptual components in accessible terms, establishes a framework of reference that helps determine what does – and does not – constitute Islamophobia. Types of intervention that will be Islamophobic include: ‘causing, calling for, aiding or justifying acts of aggression against Muslims’; ‘dehumanising, demonising or making stereotypical allegations about Muslims’ and ‘prescribing to/ propagating conspiracy theories about Muslims.’

 
What Islamophobia is not
While the definition from the All Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims has been broadly taken up, there is a small but influential group of commentators and ideologues who have vociferously opposed the definition, with some opting to misrepresent the examples set out in the definition.

The Muslim Council of Britain’s report addresses commonly raised objections. Context is key when Islamophobia is considered; examples where interventions may not be Islamophobic include: ‘being critical of Islam or religions in general, which would not automatically make you an Islamophobe unless you were using the language of racism and Islamophobic; and calling out and campaigning against criminality where Muslims may happen to be involved without impugning all Muslims.’ The report emphasises how the APPG definition of Islamophobia is in fact in favour of free speech: ‘Naming a prejudice is not an act of censorship. Giving considered definitions to racism, antisemitism or Islamophobia, for example, allows us to express ourselves in a more informed and considerate manner.’

[hypochondriac]

What is the 'language of Islamophobia?' What's 'prescribing to conspiracy theories about Muslims?' Both of those statements would give me cause for concern given that the child rape scandals have previously been dismissed as conspiracy theories. 'allows us to express ourselves in a more informed and considerate manner' sounds Orwellian. 

Edited Friday at 21:33 by hypochondriac

[sadoldgit]

Poor Nigel!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigeln-farage-elon-musk-reform-b2674035.html

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Poor Nigel!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigeln-farage-elon-musk-reform-b2674035.html

Presumably you're supporting Farage over this one as he criticised Tommy Robinson. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

33 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Presumably you're supporting Farage over this one as he criticised Tommy Robinson. 

Is he still a twat that shouldn’t be getting involved in British politics ? 

[sadoldgit]

31 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Presumably you're supporting Farage over this one as he criticised Tommy Robinson. 

As you will know well, I support neither of them one iota. I suspect that Farage is only trying to distance himself from Robinson because he feels that he will be sullied by Tommy’s thuggish reputation.

[Wade Garrett]

Musk is a fucking prick.  Would love the government, and Nigel Farage, to just tell him to fuck right off.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

On 03/01/2025 at 21:06, hypochondriac said:

What is the 'language of Islamophobia?' What's 'prescribing to conspiracy theories about Muslims?' Both of those statements would give me cause for concern given that the child rape scandals have previously been dismissed as conspiracy theories. 'allows us to express ourselves in a more informed and considerate manner' sounds Orwellian. 

Happy New Year Hypo.

The second part gives guidance on examples of what isn't.

"...which would not automatically make you an Islamophobe unless you were using the language of racism and Islamophobic; and calling out and campaigning against criminality where Muslims may happen to be involved without impugning all Muslims.’ The report emphasises how the APPG definition of Islamophobia is in fact in favour of free speech:"

I think that a lot of issues raised fall into the realm of criminality, as they would regardless of the religion of those perpetrating the offences.

[whelk]

39 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

Musk is a fucking prick.  Would love the government, and Nigel Farage, to just tell him to fuck right off.

I’d go further, MI6 should take out the cunt

[Tamesaint]

17 minutes ago, whelk said:

I’d go further, MI6 should take out the cunt

Its all right. Some American will try that soon. 

[Wade Garrett]

11 hours ago, Tamesaint said:

Its all right. Some American will try that soon. 

They’re the experts!

[Farmer Saint]

13 hours ago, whelk said:

I’d go further, MI6 should take out the cunt

Just anyone should. Shame he wasn't in New Orleans over Xmas.

[skintsaint]

[benjii]

Much bigger danger to your kids than any rape gang.

[Wade Garrett]

22 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Starmer would go way up in my estimation if he just called Musk a cunt.

[badgerx16]

...

Edited Monday at 09:55 by badgerx16

[badgerx16]

( Oops, something went wrong in the above post. )

[whelk]

31 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

Starmer would go way up in my estimation if he just called Musk a cunt.

And ban Twitter and any imports or manufacturing of Teslas. Give the Daily Mail some genuine stuff to bleat about. And then Tweet MI6 have the reach of Mossad you weird cunt. Shake up politics!

[revolution saint]

55 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Sounds like a desperate troll and an attempt to get some attention.  I mean, is he seriously suggesting America should "liberate" us?  Poor effort, could do better.

[Wade Garrett]

21 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Sounds like a desperate troll and an attempt to get some attention.  I mean, is he seriously suggesting America should "liberate" us?  Poor effort, could do better.

Musk is about as American as Big Ben.

[hypochondriac]

30 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Sounds like a desperate troll and an attempt to get some attention.  I mean, is he seriously suggesting America should "liberate" us?  Poor effort, could do better.

He's taking the piss quite obviously. Most of the crap he posts on twitter is trolling which is hilarious when the media reports his latest tweet as news. 

[revolution saint]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

He's taking the piss quite obviously. Most of the crap he posts on twitter is trolling which is hilarious when the media reports his latest tweet as news. 

TBH I don't follow him so unless he pops up in the news then I don't have much of an idea what he's doing.  Seems quite childish but then from what I can tell, he is quite childish.

[benjii]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

He's taking the piss quite obviously. Most of the crap he posts on twitter is trolling which is hilarious when the media reports his latest tweet as news. 

It's hardly harmless trolling. It is calculated to be amplified and to dog whistle to all the MAGA retards that are willing to give him more power. 

 

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, benjii said:

It's hardly harmless trolling. It is calculated to be amplified and to dog whistle to all the MAGA retards that are willing to give him more power. 

 

I didn't say it was harmless. I don't think he should be doing it. My theory is he's deliberately being as inflammatory as possible daring the government to try to do something but knowing that there isn't much they really can do because Trump isn't going to ban him. In my opinion it's calculated. 

[benjii]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

I didn't say it was harmless. I don't think he should be doing it. My theory is he's deliberately being as inflammatory as possible daring the government to try to do something but knowing that there isn't much they really can do because Trump isn't going to ban him. In my opinion it's calculated. 

Ah, I see.

Trump will ditch him faster than he can say "orange rapist in a nappy" if Trump decides he's no use to him, though.

[hypochondriac]

19 minutes ago, benjii said:

Ah, I see.

Trump will ditch him faster than he can say "orange rapist in a nappy" if Trump decides he's no use to him, though.

There's been some speculation about that but we don't know what is said behind the scenes. For all we know, Trump is supportive of his tweeting. It's not like Trump hasn't had his own fair share. 

Personally I don't mind public figures providing their opinion on UK politics but the relentless nature of this means it's probably been discussed behind the scenes or he's trying to influence Reform to be softer on Tommy Robinson.

[SaintsLoyal]

Musk is a knob, a sad attention seeking gimp who no doubt will be binned by Trump sometime this year.

He clearly has no idea whats going on in this country and posts on his twitter are in the main, total misinformation !

Anyone going deep on this muslim stuff is a racist and simply using it to bash muslims per se.

 

 

 

 

  

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, SaintsLoyal said:

Musk is a knob, a sad attention seeking gimp who no doubt will be binned by Trump sometime this year.

He clearly has no idea whats going on in this country and posts on his twitter are in the main, total misinformation !

Anyone going deep on this muslim stuff is a racist and simply using it to bash muslims per se.

 

I've already said I disagree with how Musk has been tweeting but that's clearly untrue. Plenty of people from across the political spectrum have reacted with horror and confirmed that there very much has and continues to be a problem here. It's not all Muslims clearly but there is quite obviously a cultural problem with these rape gangs, it's undeniable. 

 

 

  

I've already said I disagree with how Musk has been tweeting but that's clearly untrue. Plenty of people from across the political spectrum have reacted with horror and confirmed that there very much has and continues to be a problem here. It's not all Muslims clearly but there is quite obviously a cultural problem with these rape gangs, it's undeniable. 

https://x.com/TheHarrisSultan/status/1875390537337073789?t=n0aPtPKTwPinT-Fj9GLPsA&s=19

Edited Monday at 12:03 by hypochondriac

[aintforever]

8 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I've already said I disagree with how Musk has been tweeting but that's clearly untrue. Plenty of people from across the political spectrum have reacted with horror and confirmed that there very much has and continues to be a problem here. It's not all Muslims clearly but there is quite obviously a cultural problem with these rape gangs, it's undeniable. 

https://x.com/TheHarrisSultan/status/1875390537337073789?t=n0aPtPKTwPinT-Fj9GLPsA&s=19

Weird how those obsessed with it don't seem to make such a big deal of the child abuse carried out by white Christians in the church and the cover-up that appears to go right to the very top.

We all know why though don't we, it's not hard to read between the lines.

[hypochondriac]

31 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Weird how those obsessed with it don't seem to make such a big deal of the child abuse carried out by white Christians in the church and the cover-up that appears to go right to the very top.

We all know why though don't we, it's not hard to read between the lines.

Obsessed with it is a terrible thing to say. Not sure if you're talking about me but if so I'm not obsessed, I didn't even know all the details until the court transcripts were highlighted last week. I was sickened, as it appears many were and by the cover up from the establishment and police which in many ways is just as bad if not worse than the crimes. If someone has court transcripts from Catholic sex cases where there was systemic cover ups within the police and government and where people were targeted because of their race and ethnicity then I'll be equally appaled and will call that out too in the same way. Has that happened? 

Edited Monday at 12:47 by hypochondriac

[aintforever]

9 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Obsessed with it is a terrible thing to say. Not sure if you're talking about me but if so I'm not obsessed, I didn't even know all the details until the court transcripts were highlighted last week. I was sickened, as it appears many were and by the cover up from the establishment and police which in many ways is just as bad if not worse than the crimes. 

I agree the cases are shocking, but so is what Christians are doing in the church which is also covered up by the institution and looks like it goes right to the very top.

Why the calls for certain people for a inquiry into one (when there already has been one) yet silence on the other?

We all know why don't we.

 

Edited Monday at 12:53 by aintforever

[hypochondriac]

Just now, aintforever said:

I agree the cases are shocking, but so is what Christians are doing in the church which is also covered up by the institution and looks like it goes right to the very top.

Why the calls for certain people for a enquiry into one (when there already has been one) yet silence on the other?

We all know why don't we.

 

As I understand it, the person who did that enquiry said that the 'grooming gang' part of the enquiry was a side issue and wasn't the major part of the enquiry. Did the Catholic church abuse carry on for decades because politicians and police covered it up? Maybe it did, in which case I'd support a similar enquiry for that too. I haven't yet seen evidence that the two things are comparable in relation to how those in government and the police covered things up. 

[whelk]

7 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

As I understand it, the person who did that enquiry said that the 'grooming gang' part of the enquiry was a side issue and wasn't the major part of the enquiry. Did the Catholic church abuse carry on for decades because politicians and police covered it up? Maybe it did, in which case I'd support a similar enquiry for that too. I haven't yet seen evidence that the two things are comparable in relation to how those in government and the police covered things up. 

You know certain types are desperate to have a go at anything ‘Christian’and at pains to excuse anything ‘Islamic’?

They post saying ‘we all know why’ but very clear what sort of apologists they are - no crime is too abhorrent to cloud their own perceived self-righteousness.

 

[rallyboy]

Anyone defending Musk is clearly on a wind-up and has too much time on their hands.  🙃

[hypochondriac]

Just now, whelk said:

You know certain types are desperate to have a go at anything ‘Christian’and at pains to excuse anything ‘Islamic’?

They post saying ‘we all know why’ but very clear what sort of apologists they are - no crime is too abhorrent to cloud their own perceived self-righteousness.

 

Indeed. The fact that this was carried out largely by groups of Pakistani men is not something that anyone should be pleased about. I'd much rather it had never happened but ANY systemic coverup involving police and government should be thoroughly and properly investigated. That would be the case if any religion of belief set influenced this horrible abuse. 

[badgerx16]

Musk is a substance obtained post-mortem from a gland located close to the genitals of a male deer.

 

It is also something of animal origin used in perfume.

[Winnersaint]

Can’t wait to see what 21st Jan brings in the US with Elonald Trusk in the White House.

[aintforever]

10 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Indeed. The fact that this was carried out largely by groups of Pakistani men is not something that anyone should be pleased about. I'd much rather it had never happened but ANY systemic coverup involving police and government should be thoroughly and properly investigated. That would be the case if any religion of belief set influenced this horrible abuse. 

I agree. But we all know that if the Church's child abuse and following cover-up had been carried out by Imams certain people would be making a much bigger deal of it.

[badgerx16]

2 minutes ago, Winnersaint said:

Can’t wait to see what 21st Jan brings in the US with Elonald Trusk in the White House.

Biden has stimied much of Trump's plans for the expansion of off-shore drilling.

( Building on Trump's own act during his first term of blocking such activity off the coast of Florida ).

Edited Monday at 13:24 by badgerx16

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

I agree. But we all know that if the Church's child abuse and following cover-up had been carried out by Imams certain people would be making a much bigger deal of it.

Maybe but that hasn't happened so it's speculation at the moment. The problem here is the coverup from the government and police which is what I think is the most relevant part here. Fear of being accused of racism is a big reason why this has been allowed to continue unchecked for years and it can't keep happening. 

[Turkish]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Maybe but that hasn't happened so it's speculation at the moment. The problem here is the coverup from the government and police which is what I think is the most relevant part here. Fear of being accused of racism is a big reason why this has been allowed to continue unchecked for years and it can't keep happening. 

Look at the reaction on here. Mention it you must be racist. Mention it but why aren't you mentioning grooming gangs here, there, somewhere else. Mention it you're only mentioning it because you're using it to attack muslims. The social conditioning that people talk about is alive and well.

[aintforever]

14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Maybe but that hasn't happened so it's speculation at the moment. The problem here is the coverup from the government and police which is what I think is the most relevant part here. Fear of being accused of racism is a big reason why this has been allowed to continue unchecked for years and it can't keep happening. 

I agree it can't keep happening. I'm pretty sure that was part of the findings of the last inquiry.

[benjii]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c75wp53vk1lo

 

"P.s. Musk is a cunt", said the PM.

[hypochondriac]

52 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I agree it can't keep happening. I'm pretty sure that was part of the findings of the last inquiry.

As I said, my understanding of the last enquiry was that the person involved in it said that rape gangs were not the main focus of the inquiry. So there hasn't been a full and thorough investigation on this issue. 

[hypochondriac]

56 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I agree it can't keep happening. I'm pretty sure that was part of the findings of the last inquiry.

Double post

Edited Monday at 14:37 by hypochondriac