Muslims comment on Olypmic timing

Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
Joe42 said:
So... where is your evidence?
Don't ask. Cows and grass was too complicated apparently. So was muslims and olympics.
Again, where is your evidence for that?

ROFL. I don't need to prove that what is not there is not there.
If you think it exists then you can show it. If not then it doesn't exist.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Dec 2003
Posts
960
Location
Keele
I've tried to stay out of this lexical argument so far but seriously virii, you have to admit that Joe42 has got a point. At the end of the day, the fact that the majority of people could misinterpret it to the extent that it could form discriminatory views makes the presentation of the article dubious. Again, I'm not saying that it should not have been published, only that most people who read it are likely to take it the wrong way.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
4,521
VIRII said:
LOL and your post shows the depth of your education does it?

You're the kid at school who during any class debates there would be a collective "sigh" from the rest of the class whenever he raised his hand to add his two pence.

That same kid is the one who would never see what was right in front of his eyes. The same kid who refused to do his own research: who would have a book in front of him with all the information he needed to show how silly whatever it was he was arguing was but still scream at those pointing out the inadequacies in his argument for them to open the book, right in front of him, and disprove it.

That same kid was also a master of irritating people to the point where the teacher (or in this case admins) have to step in and discipline others after they've gotten so angry at trying to talk/ having to listen to such rubbish that they've snapped: That same kid who screams blue murder then sits at home feeling proud of his days work thinking he’s contributed to a debate and got one up on others.

It's nothing to be proud of. It's shameful.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Dec 2003
Posts
960
Location
Keele
VIRII said:
ROFL. I don't need to prove that what is not there is not there.
If you think it exists then you can show it. If not then it doesn't exist.

Also virii, this argument could be used against you, so its not a good argument. If I said that this article shows Islamaphobism, and my reason for saying this is that 'it says Muslims, if it meant some muslims, it would have said some', then you would have to prove that it means, some, which you cannot just as someone who is arguing that it means all cannot do.

the ambiguity is the problem!!!
(Flippin eck :p ! Apologies for dragging the point on!)
 
Last edited:
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
Hellsmk2 said:
You're the kid at school who during any class debates there would be a collective "sigh" from the rest of the class whenever he raised his hand to add his two pence.

Really? Are you the one that cried a lot and got bullied at lunchtime?
Hellsmk2 said:
That same kid is the one who would never see what was right in front of his eyes. The same kid who refused to do his own research: who would have a book in front of him with all the information he needed to show how silly whatever it was he was arguing was but still scream at those pointing out the inadequacies in his argument for them to open the book, right in front of him, and disprove it.

If it is your point then it is down to you to prove it. If you can't prove it then that is your problem not mine. I wonder why you are so loathe to back up your points with this easily referenced evidence, indeed you'd rather argue over whose responsibility it is to provide evidence to back a viewpoint than provide it...... Looks pretty weak to me.....
Hellsmk2 said:
That same kid was also a master of irritating people to the point where the teacher (or in this case admins) have to step in and discipline others after they've gotten so angry at trying to talk/ having to listen to such rubbish that they've snapped: That same kid who screams blue murder then sits at home feeling proud of his days work thinking he’s contributed to a debate and got one up on others.

Now that sounds rather like you there. It is normal in debate for the person stating a fact to provide the required evidence for it. It is not normal for the person questioning the statement to google it.
Hellsmk2 said:
It's nothing to be proud of. It's shameful.
Indeed and I hope that you are thoroughly ashamed of yourself and your petty insults :)
 
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
WushuMaster said:
I've tried to stay out of this lexical argument so far but seriously virii, you have to admit that Joe42 has got a point. At the end of the day, the fact that the majority of people could misinterpret it to the extent that it could form discriminatory views makes the presentation of the article dubious. Again, I'm not saying that it should not have been published, only that most people who read it are likely to take it the wrong way.
The majority of people could misinterpret anything. That doesn't make the headline wrong though.
 
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
WushuMaster said:
Also virii, this argument could be used against you, so its not a good argument. If I said that this article shows Islamaphobism, and my reason for saying this is that 'it says Muslims, if it meant some muslims, it would have said some', then you would have to prove that it means, some, which you cannot just as someone who is arguing that it means all cannot do.
It could but as long as it doesn't mean ALL then Joe has nothing to whine about.
Of course if you use the "if it meant some" argument then you immediately face the "if it meant all" argument so you can't simply assume it means all and complain on that basis.
 
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
WushuMaster said:
the ambiguity is the problem!!!
(Flippin eck :p ! Apologies for dragging the point on!)
Hehe it is ambiguous, I guess it just means that in order to fully understand the headline you have to read the whole article, which once read leaves no doubts at all, nor is it guilty of the garbage Joe accused it of.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Dec 2003
Posts
960
Location
Keele
VIRII said:
It could but as long as it doesn't mean ALL then Joe has nothing to whine about.
Of course if you use the "if it meant some" argument then you immediately face the "if it meant all" argument so you can't simply assume it means all and complain on that basis.

Again thats not the point. The point is that if it is interpreted by most people as meaning all, or even most, then it is misleading. And that is irresponsible journalism.
 
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
WushuMaster said:
Again thats not the point. The point is that if it is interpreted by most people as meaning all, or even most, then it is misleading. And that is irresponsible journalism.
Only if people read the headline and not the content AND assume that muslims = all muslims.
That then is irresponsible newspaper reading.
That can't be any more the fault of the paper than it is the fault of Ford when someone stacks their mondeo as a result of not paying attention and making assumptions.

Incidentally you'd need to prove that MOST people will interpret it your way .... which I don't think anyone has done.... although we've seen "but DM readers are VERY susceptible to suggestion" ..... lol
 
Last edited:
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
Zip said:
So who hates what now? :confused:

Can someone give me a rundown in whats happend in this thread?

Yup the daily mail ran an article on a muslim group moaning about the date of the olympics as it clashes with ramadan.
Other muslim groups are quoted saying it isn't a big deal and there are ways the athletes can deal with it, eg fast after Ramadan.

However because the DM published it the consensus amongst a few posters is that it is a hate article and that the article claims all muslims are whining about ramadan.

I dispute that and won't be badgered into their prejudice re the DM. I'll take the article on its own merits and there is no evidence of the hate that is claimed in there. Nor does muslims = all muslims.

Children killed in motorway crash = OMGZ0R all the children in the whole world are dead!!!!
 
Permabanned
Joined
19 Nov 2002
Posts
298
Jeepers, usually I find myself disagreeing with most of Virii's posts, and I dont mind muslims in this country, am all for multicultuarism, hate the daily mail, but on reading the article it seems fairly well-balanced and I have to agree with Virii.
Goes off now for an aspirin...
 
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
rabanthor said:
Jeepers, usually I find myself disagreeing with most of Virii's posts, and I dont mind muslims in this country, am all for multicultuarism, hate the daily mail, but on reading the article it seems fairly well-balanced and I have to agree with Virii.
Goes off now for an aspirin...

LOL ;)
I thought you were a fully paid up fan club member personally ......
 
Permabanned
Joined
19 Nov 2002
Posts
298
OT - As you can tell most of the time I lurk rather than post. I do enjoy the ongoing Visage/Virii tussle. Handy its easy to see when you're both logged on!
 
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
30,259
rabanthor said:
OT - As you can tell most of the time I lurk rather than post. I do enjoy the ongoing Visage/Virii tussle. Handy its easy to see when you're both logged on!
He's in first time dad mode so I reckon he'll have less posting time on his hands now. Shame lol.
 
Back
Top Bottom