egg

I don't want to believe that idiots like Musk have a huge influence but alas they do. We're living in a world where rhetoric is stated as fact, and a huge number of people lap it up. Something being rolled out on the pages of the sun back in the day carried much less weight than it going out on X, then being disseminated from there. There was a time when noise from someone like Musk wouldn't have made it's way across the ocean. That's not the case and we can't avoid that he's now having an impact on British politics - the fact that we're discussing him tells a story.

You're comparing an apple and a pip imo. That said, I get your point that Musk isn't as powerful in many respects as men with military's under their control, but unusually I agree with Hypo. I think the point really is that we're now in a different era and power can, and is, exterted in different ways and the power of global influence is hugely powerful.

You forgot that rather important bit when you initially quoted Hypo. None of the people you listed had a global platform under their control and/or more money than anyone else on earth, ever. I'm not sure why you can't accept the power and influence that brings.

Recognising his influence on the masses (and Trump) doesn't make a person a fan of his. I'm no fan at all, he's dangerous, but that doesn't prevent me from taking an objective view.

I think you underestimate the power in words on a global scale, and the ability of people to believe his rhetoric.

Yep. What we don't yet know is the extent of his influence over Trump, and how much a role he'll have running the new US/Greenland/Panama/Canada superstate.

Yep. Wanting something different to what we're getting seems to be labelled as far right. It feels arrogant, out of touch and often plain wrong.

The point is that nobody has to prove that Musk is wrong. He has to prove that he's right. In the absence of evidence to justify his case, then it must follow that he's making baseless allegations. We're in real danger of falling into line with the American's of having a political system where serious allegations are made and considered true until proved to the contrary.

Extending my last post, of others repeated my allegations they wouldn't be any more true would they. You're 180 degrees out on this.

Allegations are just noise. By your rationale I could allege that you've done x,y, or z, but with the onus being on you to prove that you haven't. That would be nonsensical.

It's for him to prove he's right, not others to prove he's wrong.

Indeed. The presumption must be that there was no cover up unless there is evidence to the contrary.

Yep, THB has promise but no more than that for me. That said, he's British and young, so there'll be a market for him.

That is not a positive in the wrong hands. We've spent plenty of money, and bought the shit show you mention. I agree though that Juric, on paper, is decent.

Agreed...I was adding to MLG's points.

All valid points, but you overlook fitness and commitment.

I don't disagree. He's worth keeping for next season, and needs a loan for the remainder of this imo.

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)?

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.

Look hard enough and you'll find arguments for and against. The concerning thing for me, as per that video, is the willingness of some not just to say that Islamaphobia is not racism, but to seek to argue that Islamaphobia is not a thing. That's nonsense.

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

You're making a pointless point. You agree that Islamaphobia is unpleasant. There's plenty of commentary on Wikipedia if the detail excites you, and Wes Streeting wrote an article years ago stating the case for it being racism. Whether it is or isn't though is an irrelevant detail imo - racism, anti semitism, Islamaphobia, etc, are all forms of discrimination against groups of people.

I'm not what point are you trying to make. If by some people's interpretation, Islamaphobia is not a form of racism, it's no less unpleasant. The same applies to anti-Semitism. On the latter point, David Baddiel once wrote that 'jews are racialized whether they like it or not' and I think the same applies to Muslims.

I'm not getting into an MLG style discussion with you. Others have covered it.

No trolling Hypo. You've shown yourself time and time again to be islamaphobic. That's what's 'sad and unfortunate'.