[Closed] Muslims offended again

Easily offended people are easily offended.

It's not just Muslims.

Christians are not exactly known for being thick skinned either.

Neither is my old neighbour and I don't think he believes in a god at all.

Are you offended by their taking offence?

Muslim groups have reportedly previously called for a jihad on dogs.

If I'd have known that before, I'd have converted to Islam. I've always thought they were bang on about dogs being filthy creatures that have no place in a civilised society, but if they're going to get shut of them all, then [b]ALLAH AKHBAAAAAAAR!!!!![/b] 😀

[i]Why is it never Hindus, Buddhists (D'uh!!), Sikhs[/i]

Do you read the news beyond the stuff about Muslims?

There's continuous violence throughout India and the far East as a result of various religious groups taking offence at some perceived slight from another one.

As an example;

Buddhist monks attack Muslims;

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22356306 ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22356306[/url]

Yesterday - violence between Sikhs and Muslims.

[url= http://www.firstpost.com/politics/curfew-relaxed-in-saharanpur-violence-was-pre-planned-say-sikh-victims-1637679.html ]http://www.firstpost.com/politics/curfew-relaxed-in-saharanpur-violence-was-pre-planned-say-sikh-victims-1637679.html[/url]

and it goes on. Do a google search for the name of any religion followed by 'offence' or 'violence' and it's there.

Some just gets reported more in certain types of British newspapers than others.

Also, don;t forget it's not *all* members of a religious faith who take offence or attack others - the newspapers just find it easier to portray it that way...

Different cultures have different values
you can either decide to learn what these are and respect them or moan about how easily offended they are when you are insensitive to their culture
the choice is yours.

Many Muslims refuse to have direct contact with dogs, which are considered by some to be "unclean" in Islamic culture. Some overseas Muslim groups have reportedly previously called for a jihad on dogs.
Possibly making matters worse was the fact that Jock, who was supposed to lead out the Malaysian team, sat down and refused to move as soon as his coat was put on, meaning he had to be carried by the team representative.
Mohamad Sabu, the deputy president of the opposition Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party said: "Malaysia and all Islamic countries deserve and apology from the organiser.
"This is just so disrespectful to Malaysia and Muslims – especially as it happened during Ramadan. Muslims are not allowed to touch dogs, so the organiser should have been more aware and sensitive on this issue.
"It is hoped this incident can teach other Western countries to be more respectful in the future."

Given the amount of bodily flesh displayed by non-muslims at this time of the year, and much of it distasteful to non-muslims as well, I think the majority of muslims are remarkably forebearing.

extreme or controversial points of view make better headlines than 'meh, so what'

you can either decide to learn what these are and respect them or moan about how easily offended they are when you are insensitive to their culture

They're not the only two option though are they? The other option is to learn about their views, become fully educated about their culture and then continue to hold it in complete disdain.

That's my approach.

Was any muslim actually forced to touch any of the dogs?

I forgot how many tree hugger do gooders there were on here who would opt for that one

Forgive my error 😉

Was any muslim actually forced to touch any of the dogs?

no offence but there is a link and i quoted a fair amount of it .

[b]Possibly making matters worse was the fact that Jock, who was supposed to lead out the Malaysian team, sat down and refused to move as soon as his coat was put on, meaning he had to be carried by the team representative.[/b]

Everyone gets offended, it's just that the Telegraph and the Daily Mail only tell you about the Muslims in a bid to control your tiny little mind.

I forgot how many tree hugger do gooders there were on here who would opt for that one

Bit confused as to the link between environmental concern and cowardly culture relativism?

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/christian-groups-violently-offended-black-jesus-series-article-1.1879233

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/10635857/Arundhati-Roy-condemns-Penguin-for-withdrawing-book-which-offended-Hindu-extremists.html

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/faith_and_values/2014/07/11/hindus-offended-by-urban-outfitters-duvet-cover.html

Can we move on?

no offence but there is a link and i quoted a fair amount of it .

No problem, I did have a look at the article, as the link does not work, but missed that part.

I would still like to assume that the team representative was informed before the ceremony that the dog would be involved and that that was acceptable, rather than just being given a dog to carry.

Ferris-Beuller - Member
Its always the same record

If you keep listening to the same record it will always sound the same 🙂

Looks to me like a couple of Malaysian politicians trying (and winning at) to get their names in the press and get a bit of a boost to their profile. That and the Telegraph being able to make middle England and some folk STW froth about how ridiculous the complaints are.

I think it was little shortsighted of the organizers not to think of this, its pretty well known that Muslims think dogs are unclean. You can go round an Arab city and there will be hundreds of skanky cats but no dogs.

Given the amount of bodily flesh displayed by non-muslims at this time of the year, and much of it distasteful to non-muslims as well, I think the majority of muslims are remarkably forebearing.

"Vast majority of people pretty much in favour of live-and-let-live" is the headline the DM's probably least likely to ever print.

meaning he had to be carried by the team representative

It was insensitive to expect a muslim team rep to carry a dog, but to be fair he or she didn't actually [u]have[/u] to, did they?

All I can say is it's a good job that white people never get 'offended' by black people and drag them to their deaths behind a [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd,_Jr. ]pickup truck[/url]. Or get so offended by brown people that they murder old men and [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-24675040 ] blow up mosques[/url]. Pesky white people, always causing problems, why do they think they're so special?

I think it was little shortsighted of the organizers not to think of this, its pretty well known that Muslims think dogs are unclean

Yep, they should have changed the whole ceremony on that basis. Unfortunately, as a FSM high priest I find fireworks and walking and [insert anything else] offensive, so they really might struggle to organise anything palatable.

its pretty well known that Muslims think dogs are unclean.

Plenty of people think plenty of things, doesn't make them true.

Charlie Brooker's column on 'offence' jumps to mind here. It's a fine line between "respecting" and "pandering." How much respect is being paid to the traditions and culture of Scotland by calling one of their mascots "unclean"?

In the interests of balance, can I be offended on behalf of the Scottish?

The easy solution would have been for a dog handler to be used where appropriate.

Te easy solution would have been for a dog handler to be used where appropriate.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what happened isn't it? The "team representatives" weren't members of the teams, they were people - presumably local volunteers - who walked in front of the flag bearer, in uniform rather than team kit.

edit:
[img] [/img]

I have no idea if this woman is a muslim or not.

What I was saying is that whilst there cn be dogs in the ceremony, and I loved them, the Malayasians should have been asked if they wished to have a dog ahead of their team.

The 'Team Representative' was not Malaysian, she was Scottish (and presumably not Muslim, or not worried by dogs). No Malaysian team member was asked to touch the dog.

When in Rome.......

Lemonysam - When i first looked i thought the same, looks more like a local style of dress too. In which case this is a complete load of BS.
If it was the team rep, they would be from the team country not the host country?

All Muslims are terrierists!

Do I win a prize?

So this is BS from either the Malaysian muppets or the Telegraph muppets then.

I do not find dogs offensive and i do not find the absence of dogs offensive. Given this it is not difficult to find a solution here where no one is offended

Plenty of people think plenty of things, doesn't make them true

When in [s]Rome.....[/s] and islamic country cover your wife up and dont let her drive

It really depends on what they do in Rome tbh

EDIT 2: if it was carried by a non muslim Scots person then that is a rather important point that should have been made clear. I read it as a Malaysian carried the dog.

Problem solved:[img] [/img]

not a all Muslims think dogs are dirty, plenty own dogs as pets and plenty of Muslim places use working dogs,
is it that it wouldn't make a nice story (or thread title) for the swivel eyed loons to latch onto to justify their swivellyeyedness...

Junkyard - If the story is true, It seems that the Malaysian politicians have assumed the team rep was a muslim.

All Muslims are terrierists!

I agree it does appear that way [ see my edit] and I would probably have cared less had I realised that bit.

An explanation/history of the human race:

Person/country/culture/religion 1: You're stupid
Person/country/culture/religion 2: No, you're stupid

It seems that the Malaysian politicians have assumed the team rep was a muslim.

I think it's funny they get offended, it's just a bit much when they start chopping peoples heads off.

Has anyone asked the dog what he thinks?

I think the key point here is 'religion'. Without wishing to spark off the latest round of the STW religious wars, I feel that religion's only function is to make you think you are better than the non-believers [regardless of which actual religion] and that religious being offended is so much worse than any other kind.

I didn't see British Muslims marching in support of the UK in the aftermath of 7/7. Apart from the Muslim Council you don't see Muslims in support of the British flag, or anything associated. Very sad and very true.

Where is the 'not in our name/they don't speak for us' campaign?

Sad really. As I know some good people but theres no desire(?) .. pride? as you would get from say Sikh's.

Also sad that as I'm 'critising' above in some countries it'd mean jail/death and here at home automatically a 'racist'.

If I did the same and criticise an aspect of Christian faith/a section of the Christian community I'd be classed as 'debating' or having a 'critical view' on a subject to do with Christians.

I feel that religion's only function is to make you think you are better than the non-believers

Disagree, think the idea behind religions was to try to stop people f***ing each other over all the time.

Didn't quite work did it? Then again, maybe things would have been worse without religions.

"Dato Ibrahim Bin Ali, a far-Right politician, former MP and founder and president of Malay supremacist group Perkasa..."

If one gets offended by religious actions of others, well, thats just life. Get over it with it and move on. No point beating the drum endlessly about it is, these people are blinkered in their religion and beliefs

hora - Member
I didn't see British Muslims marching in support of the UK in the aftermath of 7/7. Apart from the Muslim Council you don't see Muslims in support of the British flag, or anything associated. Very sad and very true.

Well said, World domination is looming

hora - Member

I didn't see British Muslims marching in support of the UK in the aftermath of 7/7. Apart from the Muslim Council you don't see Muslims in support of the British flag, or anything associated. Very sad and very true.

Yeah, because there were so many other religions marching in support of the UK, and all those other religions are always out "in support of the British flag", whatever that even means.

How about those zoroastians eh?

I didn't see British Muslims marching in support of the UK in the aftermath of 7/7

British Muslim here, and totally supported the UK stance after 7/7.

Where is the 'not in our name/they don't speak for us' campaign?

Sad really. As I know some good people but theres no desire(?) .. pride? as you would get from say Sikh's.

Shocking post hora!

Yeah, because there were so many other religions marching in support of the UK, and all those other religions are always out "in support of the British flag", whatever that even means.

Which of these have consistently been in the news for the wrong reasons?

Northwind - Member

"hora - Member

I didn't see British Muslims marching in support of the UK in the aftermath of 7/7. Apart from the Muslim Council you don't see Muslims in support of the British flag, or anything associated. Very sad and very true."

Yeah, because there were so many other religions marching in support of the UK, and all those other religions are always out "in support of the British flag", whatever that even means.

But it is 'very true' FACT

Heres a nice and sad story: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1555507/Sikh-regiment-dumped-over-racism-fears.html

You have dug out a 7 year old article to prove what?

Something a little more recent

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/muslims-in-the-armed-forces-a-proud-tradition-9226715.html

Quote 'To mark this, the MoD announced that, since 2007, the number of Muslims serving in the British Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force has risen by more than 40 per cent'

You can prove anything with facts.

I really agree with this summary. It only takes a vocal, organised minority to cause no end of bother and this current lot of nutters are 20 million strong at a minimum and in fact it's likely to be loads more. This is not 50 looneys like the Westboro Baptist Church it's millions of radicalised people who are directly opposed to how we live here in the west and would violently kybosh that if they could.

Naive to think otherwise, either this radical minority is stopped or things will only get worse.

Up 40% to 650.

Disagree, think the idea behind religions was to try to stop people f***ing each other over all the time.

Didn't quite work did it? Then again, maybe things would have been worse without religions.

I'm not sure that willingness to join the army and then die to preserve the lifestyle of rich white middle aged men should be how we measure how patriotic a religious community are?

Maybe Muslim youths are just a bit brighter than your average British squaddie?

Or they just see a future for themselves outside the forces in wider society that fulfills their economic and social aspirations?

Up 40% to 650.

I didn't see British Muslims marching in support of the UK in the aftermath of 7/7.

I didn't see you doing it either.

Im not a Muslim so how is your counter comment relevent?

I'm not sure that willingness to join the army and then die to preserve the lifestyle of rich white middle aged men should be how we measure how patriotic a religious community are?

That is a disgusting comment and shows a lack of situational awareness that is truly beyond belief.

Does anyone know how many dogs are in the armed forces? Do they outnumber the muslamics?

I didn't see British Muslims marching in support of the UK in the aftermath of 7/7. Apart from the Muslim Council you don't see Muslims in support of the British flag, or anything associated. Very sad and very true.

Where is the 'not in our name/they don't speak for us' campaign?

They do and they have it is just the press and idiots would rather ignore it and lie in bed scared that they want to convert us all to islam and are hell bent on taking over the world. you have google use it please.......10 seconds later

Muslim leaders have condemned the terror attacks on London and called for full co-operation with police. Muslim Council of Britain spokesman Inayat Bunglawala called on worshippers to pray for victims at Friday prayers.

Also sad that as I'm 'critising' above in some countries it'd mean jail/death and here at home automatically a 'racist'.

If I did the same and criticise an aspect of Christian faith/a section of the Christian community I'd be classed as 'debating' or having a 'critical view' on a subject to do with Christians.

Perhaps religion has kept the degree of disharmony in check.

Someone called a dog "JOCK" !?! How very dare they?

[i]how many dogs are in the armed forces?[/i]

200ish excluding mascots...

[url= http://www.army.mod.uk/medical-services/veterinary/30499.aspx ]http://www.army.mod.uk/medical-services/veterinary/30499.aspx[/url]

I'm not sure that willingness to join the army and then die to preserve the lifestyle of rich white middle aged men should be how we measure how patriotic a religious community are?

On a very basic level they are the men and women with sharp pointy knives protecting our way of life and our freedom.

When you join up, you join to serve. You don't get to pick and chose your conflicts.

Messy though it was/is- Should we have just let the Loyalists on their own?

Should we have let Argentina take the Falklands? What would have happened then on the world stage?

Iraq was a mistake but what about Kuwait back in the early 90's?

What about Bosnia/Serbia/Croat Muslims? Should we have let the Bosnia/Muslims suffer?

If we hadn't have flown air missions in Libya- would Gaddaffi have inflicted a bloody revenge on his people?

and historically. Would we all be speak German now with no Jewish, Slav's, any middle east faith (he would have gone after them next) people left in the world?

Im not a Muslim so how is your counter comment relevent?

Because I expected you to.

As you expected the Muslims to.

That's what's important isn't it?

Should we have let Argentina take the Falklands? What would have happened then on the world stage?

Very little. I doubt most people knew where it was until we got in a scrap over the islands. The islanders would have had different lives but short of that, maybe you can tell us what would have happened.

Muslim leaders have condemned the terror attacks on London and called for full co-operation with police. Muslim Council of Britain spokesman Inayat Bunglawala called on worshippers to pray for victims at Friday prayers.

See higher up - I mentioned the Muslim Council did I not?

How can dogs be unclean? Mine was always licking it's balls clean!

richwales - Member
How can dogs be unclean? Mine was always licking it's balls clean!

Well our is after our dogs wiped his arse on it at any rate.

Muslims .... Barking mad the lot of them .

🙂

[i]Barking mad the lot of them . [/i]

They love the place.

[img] [/img]

there was no march Hora what do you want individual comments from individual Muslims saying it was bad? What do you need to realise that all but a tiny tiny percentage of muslims [ say the same number of catholics who supported the IRA or prods who supported the UDF] were not outraged.
what about vigils for peace do they count...did you go to one?
They were as outraged as everyone else. As you did not march it is a bit odd you use this as the measure of their opposition.

Should we have let Argentina take the Falklands? What would have happened then on the world stage?

YOU? what world changing event are you predicting then?
Communists invaded germany?

If we hadn't have flown air missions in Libya- would Gaddaffi have inflicted a bloody revenge on his people?

On the other hand.... As a Christian, I just like to say how outraged I am that.

Some of the men in that opening ceremony seemed to be wearing skirts !!

People who describe our armed forces as representing or fighting on behalf of the white middle aged men are hypocrites.

Western Europe is richer than the remainder of the world by a huge margin. Even the worst off of us in a minimum wage job is still leagues ahead, in almost every way that counts, of someone living in rural Afghanistan for example.

You may perceive yourself as in someway not part of this society but you enjoy all the benefits,you live here, you'll consume, you'll be involved, you are in all practical ways the white middle aged man you so deride.
If our troops serve big business or the political classes (which I do not believe they do, although they may have done in part for example protecting oil supplies) it's your demands and needs they are ultimately fulfilling, your need to be on the web, using energy produced in a power station, to drive a car etc etc. You can be a lilly white, tree hugging, swamp lover but your still one of us and they fight and die so indirectly you can make a crappy comment about how stupid they are to do it on a mountain bike forum.

As for it's only a few radicals about 5.5 billion religious people on this planet, even at 5% radicals that's a buttload of nutters that want their version of the truth imposed on everyone else. The best thing moderate muslims could do is turn atheist in my opinion.

Some of the men in that opening ceremony seemed to be wearing skirts !!

Quite unbelievable! They've obviously not read Exodus 2:45

[i]Lo, unto Adam God said "You shall always wear trousers", and you shall not worship false trousers[/i]

He may not have put it well, but the OP has a point about the story he posted.
""Malaysia and all Islamic countries deserve and apology from the organiser.
"This is just so disrespectful to Malaysia and Muslims – especially as it happened during Ramadan. Muslims are not allowed to touch dogs, so the organiser should have been more aware and sensitive on this issue"

Piss off you idiot comes to mind.

Were the musicians offended by John Barrowman?