Current Events > BBC describes man as 'Muslim' when he's a victim, 'Indian' after he molests girl

(+) Yeah! (+)

ChainedRedone posted...

Anteaterking posted...

His religion was "relevant" in the first case (because of the talk of the Muslim ban), but not in the second case.

I don't see the malicious cover up that you do.

You'd think anyone would realize this. Guess not.

Oh wait, it's Admiral. LMAO.

Actually, you'd think people would be smart enough to realize his religion was being used to make him into a victim and spread an Islamophobia agenda, since it turned it had absolutely nothing to do with his visa issues.

Once he's the aggressor, however, and behaving in ways that might actually be acceptable/tolerated in his religious culture, no mention of it whatsoever.
---

The Admiral posted...

ChainedRedone posted...

Anteaterking posted...

His religion was "relevant" in the first case (because of the talk of the Muslim ban), but not in the second case.

I don't see the malicious cover up that you do.

You'd think anyone would realize this. Guess not.

Oh wait, it's Admiral. LMAO.

Actually, you'd think people would be smart enough to realize his religion was being used to make him into a victim and spread an Islamophobia agenda, since it turned it had absolutely nothing to do with his visa issues.

Once he's the aggressor, however, and behaving in ways that might actually be acceptable/tolerated in his religious culture, no mention of it whatsoever.

Okay, so they made a mistake. Every news outlet makes mistakes. And rarely do they apologize for it. It happens. Who cares.
---

monkmith posted...

so... was he denied a passport because of trumps muslim ban? because if so, that would be the reason they specifically brought it up...

He wasn't, because Trump's ban was never in effect.

So why then is his religion relevant
---

shockthemonkey posted...

The Admiral posted...

Miz_iZ_AwSOme_X posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

I like how no one is acknowledging that Indian culture is constantly criticized for sexual abuse and assault. Seems like pointing out that he's Indian draws attention to that deliberately.

This true though. In India women are nothing but slaves. They don't even have a choice in deciding on who they want to marry. Is even worse than the middle east. Even a brother raping his sister in India will get him an standing ovation and treat him as a hero as the woman gets shamed by the males.

This is complete horseshit. India has an incredibly diverse set of customs with regards to treatment of women. In middle and southern India (Mumbai and below), women have the choice as to who they marry and are treated with general equality. Those places are cosmopolitan and pretty westernized.

The parts of India where women are oppressed like that -- to the point where the government warns female tourists in advance about the harassment -- are in rural villages and in the northern parts that are predominantly Muslim. And in those regions, just like in the Middle East, it's the religious culture that causes the sexist attitude, not the ethnicity.

Areas like Kashmir, which you might recognize from the first headline you posted.

Exactly.
---

Well this is kind of stupidAnteaterking posted...

His religion was "relevant" in the first case (because of the talk of the Muslim ban), but not in the second case.

I don't see the malicious cover up that you do.

---

Khalpz posted...

Well this is kind of stupidAnteaterking posted...

His religion was "relevant" in the first case (because of the talk of the Muslim ban), but not in the second case.

I don't see the malicious cover up that you do.

Right because the prevalence of rapist muslims in the EU doesn't make it relevant at all

Remember how police in Rotherham let muslim rapists go because they didn't want to seem bigoted?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal

If being muslim is relevant to one's refugee status, then it's also relevant to sex crimes.
---

It's especially relevant because his crime was kissing a 12 year-old, which is the youngest age of consent according to Islam. He didn't force himself on her, so he might actually have believed his actions were acceptable since Islamic culture has no problem with what he did.
---

UnholyMudcrab posted...

It's about the context. His being Muslim is directly related to the first headline, but not the second one.

Even though islam is well known for child brides and their "prophet" had sex with a 9 year old?
---

unpleasant_milk posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Admiral upset that a Muslim wasn't painted in the worst light possible.

Wondered when the usual apologists would materialise.

Not disappointed

No one should care that on one article they're labeled Muslim when talking about the travel ban and the other article they aren't when it doesn't matter.

The only reason this would be a story is if they specifically said something like "this person isn't a Muslim" in the second story but they didn't.

I don't know why the right wants to paint every story with a Muslim in it as if they're the worst possible person out there. It's fucking stupid and it's why we don't take you guys seriously.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

No one should care that on one article they're labeled Muslim when talking about the travel ban and the other article they aren't when it doesn't matter.

Except for the facts that:

1. The visa issue had nothing to do with the travel ban, so his religion was irrelevant. Could have just described him as Indian in that article, but that wouldn't have pushed their narrative.

2. The religion might actually be relevant to the crime given that he consensually kissed a 12 year-old girl, which is permissible under Islam.
---

People trying to justify and explain the BBC's alternate language but we all know what's going on. Don't be blind.
---

Vyrulisse posted...

People trying to justify and explain the BBC's alternate language but we all know what's going on. Don't be blind.

Yeah; Admiral hates Muslims and want them painted in the worst light possible.
---