Re: Bachar Houli | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Re: Bachar Houli

Max said:
Was sitting in the MCC and heard a teenager call him a Jihadist, I had a stern word at him but I couldn't believe that it still happens in this day and age (must be my naivety).

According to http://www.aboutjihad.com/ (a pro-Muslim site) the definition of Jihad is as follows:

Jihad: means "struggle" and "strive" against evil thoughts, evil action and aggression against a person, family, society or country. Jihad may be a "justifiable war", borrowing the Christian term.

Chances are he'd flattered to be called a 'Jihadist', the negative connotations of that word being largely a western construct. The fact is all practicing Muslims are 'Jihadists', often just differing in terms of means to the end. To some the struggle is personal in how they conduct their daily lives, others join organisations and pressure groups to effect 'positive' change, whilst others resort to terrorism. Of course having said that if Islamic law is imposed via the ballot box rather than through the barrel of the gun it doesn't make it any less repulsive or repugnant or reactionary.

Either way we'd be utterly stuffed, but what I'm saying is a Jihadist is not by definition a terrorist. Calling Houli a downhill skier and squib (which he is) I think he would have found far more offensive
 
I have to say, I didn't think calling someone a Jihadist is, on its own, a derogatory term.
 
tigerlove said:
I have to say, I didn't think calling someone a Jihadist is, on its own, a derogatory term.

As always, it depends on the intent of the person using the term and also how the recipient is affected.

In today's language, Jihadist is a bit more extreme a word:

Jihadism (jihadist movement, jihadi movement and variants) is used to refer to contemporary armed jihad in Islamic fundamentalism.

While you could argue is a similar word to Crusader, I think the intent when delivered today is different.
 
Baloo said:
As always, it depends on the intent of the person using the term and also how the recipient is affected.

In today's language, Jihadist is a bit more extreme a word:

While you could argue is a similar word to Crusader, I think the intent when delivered today is different.

To a Muslim, to a left-winger, to the politically correct, the word crusader is a slur. To a traditional christian, a right winger, a social conservative, it's a compliment irregardless of the intent of the person saying it...just saying...
 
JimJessTorp said:
It is when the person using the term is intending it to be derogatory.

Well I guess you could say that of any term surrounded by other derogatory words. Anyhow I personally wouldn't go around calling people Jihadists just like I wouldn't go around calling people Jews or WOGS. It really doesn't matter to me where someone comes from or their religious beliefs as long as they don't push the mantra onto me. I just think we encourage this by dramatising every instance in the media. I experienced plenty more racism in my travels in many other countries of the world. Anyhow bit off topic.
 
Tygrys said:
To a Muslim, to a left-winger, to the politically correct, the word crusader is a slur. To a traditional christian, a right winger, a social conservative, it's a compliment irregardless of the intent of the person saying it...just saying...

Not sure. I think the term Crusaders has lost it's original meaning. We even have rugby teams calling themselves the Crusaders. But again, it's always how the recipient receives the remark that really matters.

The niave bogan aussie that I was(am) still remembers calling a Pom of central Asian descent a "Paki" and it was in no way meant anything derogatory. I found out pretty quickly that it's deemed an offensive term and I really should never use it again.
 
Tony Braxton-Hicks said:
Memories of when Jake King was taking em on in the back line, and then North played Corey Jones on him one-out in their forward line.

Stop Houli's run and we don't get the ball across the centre. It's too easy for them.

Corey Jones could outmark a ruckman, TBH. Ouch. I'm still scarred by that. :hihi Houli is only supported by Rance. It's not enough.

joegarra said:
How about playing McIntosh there as another runner. Vlaustin is wasted in the back half.

I wish we had another few McIntoshes, joe. We need a couple to give us the run out of the backline.
 
Apparently the remarks were made by 3aws John Burns, some high profile media person I;ve never heard of him.
 
IanG said:
Apparently the remarks were made by 3aws John Burns, some high profile media person I;ve never heard of him.

Hes on there morning show, reckons he doesn't remember saying it . What a load of crap.
 
IanG said:
Apparently the remarks were made by 3aws John Burns, some high profile media person I;ve never heard of him.
Considering that he was a barrister before going onto a radio career, you'd think he would have known better.
 
Just listened to Burns interview on 3aw and he doesnt deny saying it just "that I can't recall saying anything offensive"
 
I listen to them in the morning. Either he said it and needs to apologise, or he didn't say it and doesn't apologise. It's the non-apology!!! Very disappointed in Burnso, and disappointed that the club consider the matter closed.
 
joegarra said:
I listen to them in the morning. Either he said it and needs to apologise, or he didn't say it and doesn't apologise. It's the non-apology!!! Very disappointed in Burnso, and disappointed that the club consider the matter closed.

he said he apologised if he said something but he can't recall if he did , work that one out. :spin
 
tiges said:
he said he apologised if he said something but he can't recall if he did , work that one out. :spin

sounds like a barrister!
 
Where else would you see a committed Muslim hugging a committed Jehovah's Witness on a Saturday afternoon? Footy is my religion.
 
KnightersRevenge said:
Where else would you see a committed Muslim hugging a committed Jehovah's Witness on a Saturday afternoon? Footy is my religion.

Heh, never looked at it like that. And I think Miles is a fairly devout Christian as well.