Should the Crusaders change their name?
-
@Mokey said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
I just think that if the Canterbury Muslim community finds the name offensive/divisive, let them put out a joint statement and say so and go from there. I'm getting sick of all these non-Muslims taking it upon themselves to decide what Muslims do/do not find offensive and what should/should not be changed.
In fact quite the opposite, the only Muslim that went on record in a MSM article said he had no problem with the name
-
@Paekakboyz said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
and I get that of course they would deny any pressure etc. But this does come across as bullshit - and it flies in the face of how things have been handled by all involved to date imo.
"How things have been handled", eh?
Like the immediate disappearing of media reports from a couple of years ago about one of the Christchurch targets being the last port of call for a couple of blokes en route to take up arms in the Middle East; placing an immediate embargo on distributing the murderer's writings, treating the populace as being as immature and unworldly as the opportunist in chief in her new headgear; saying and doing nothing about some representative loon preaching hatred of the Evil Juice in the streets of Auckland; the same fool welcoming one of Australia's best known apologists to visit, give her a hug and do a bit more marketing to nongs with soft heads; having the lackeys work the phones to have the media run a campaign to change the name of a rugby team which had nothing to do with what happened; and hijacking of the Aotea Square peace rally by activists asserting the murders were "a tragic consequence of New Zealand's failure to address racism", without speaking out to defend ordinary New Zealanders against the lie?
-
@Mick-Gold-Coast-QLD coming in hot eh?
- There has been a lot more written about the brothers in the main thread about the attack. One of wasn't radicalized at all. The other was via web connections. The mosque itself rejected leadership/funding from some hardliner group. Worth digging a bit more on that imo.
- I'm somewhat on the fence about the suppression of his writing. I get that they don't want to give it airtime and probably had advice that was an appropriate approach and outweighed free and open access. I think that many (maybe most) folks could read it and take it for the bullshit it is, without risk of that popularizing his thinking or actions.
- Some for, some against re headgear. But you've obviously got your position on the intent, authenticity, etc, etc of Ardern.
- Aotea square stuff was absolutely distasteful. But you want to shut up their free speech? Doesn't that fly in the face of your position above? Or was it the fact it wasn't called out by the powers that be?
- Have you evidence about the lackeys influencing the name change campaign? If so I'd certainly join you in condemning that.
-
“Coming in hot eh?”
That’s good, I’ll pay that.As much as anything I am reacting to a meme that has been floated over there that Arden has done a splendid job handling the Christchurch murders. She has done no more or less than could be expected. When she hugged Squalid Ali, a divisive character here, and heard his wise counsel I was reminded she is merely a politician who will turn any opportunity to advantage no matter how cynical or hypocritical the action, and that is what she did.
Quick, bung on the headwear for the cameras notwithstanding it is well known that women, who are subject to the medieval death cult, campaign against the symbols of their suppression at great personal risk – some progressive initiatives are more equal than others, evidently.
We had a sheila here like that who was acutely aware the punters have a short concentration span and, if the cunning move doesn’t quite make the desired impact the down side risk is minimal. Within a couple of days people will have swiped it from their favorites and moved onto Bonce’s analysis of the Mueller report.
These amateurs are as intellectually and morally shallow as the puddle left by a passing summer shower and they put them in charge!
On suppression of the mad ramblings of the murderer and nuking media reports on the activities of the centre attacked – let the facts be known, don’t leave it up to a police chief with an agenda (essential that he now have a bigger budget … and a salary review to recognise the added responsibility of overseeing a bigger budget) or a public servant to decide what is and isn’t appropriate for the public to know. That is no substitute for police and other agencies doing their job properly.
I watched in disbelief as the NSW police commissioner and his deputies who took charge of the Lindt Café siege (of one madman, surrounded by hundreds of police busily scribbling on clipboards for 18 hours – 18 hours until a courageous young man was murdered, sacrificed to their incompetence) mount legal action for months, seeking to avoid having to front a coronial enquiry so that they could send in their subordinates and conceal their failures. These palookas should be brought to account, not protected under national secrecy imperatives as we saw with the Stasi and the KGB, and more recently the FBI, Department of Justice, NSA, Homeland Security, CIA, NSA, GTHO, GTRXU1, Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick & Titch. Come to think of it, governments employ an awful lot of blokes in dark glasses with Glocks, looking stern and doing not much to help.
Year by year the police take on the appearance of Navy Seals – you had some girlses in burkhas guarding local libraries over there a few weeks ago (for days after the big gang of murderers had all been locked up) cradling rocket launcher look-alikes which would blow them off their feet if they accidentally found the trigger! – to no good purpose. Get them into computer analysis school and have them track the loons who respond to other loons on the internet, identify the activity centres / forward posts (I daren’t use the other name) and build a case for entry and seizure. Have them stand over the judges to issue warrants, not the general public who trust them to do their job.
There is no reason to hide a couple of media reports on the activities of one of the Christchurch targets from three or four years before, other than political inconvenience which is not a sound reason. I read an ABC report relying on the evidence of the parents of a young fellow who attended finishing school there and then headed off to serve in the Middle East. If it happened or did not happen it is up to the place itself to convince people, or to employ taqiya. It is not for government to decide what the public should read or hear.
The Aotea Square barrage should be heard, as distasteful as it was, and allowed to stand or fall on its merits. A government with a fair dinkum concern for its responsibilities, and a clear position on the fundamental issues, ought to criticise what it was about and be done with that, not shut it down. They have other much more important work to do in economic management, resources policy, cost containment, health and so on, don’t they?
Let the people decide and comment freely. If it is hurty hurt hurtful to some then they can get a wriggle on and grow up rather than turn to government to declare what is horrid, what is simply appalling, what is outrageous and what is giggle worthy.
I regard the Israel Folau matter in similar terms.
Finally, I have no doubt someone from government has planted the seed of an idea about the Crusaders name change with their favourite journalist / camp follower, or vice versa, they have kicked it around and decided to give it a run. It has distraction value at least; offers a reading on the degree of difficulty likely when they attempt much more restrictive gun laws; and it could be helpful in signalling to the other mob that the country has a genuine intention to enter the peaceful surrender phase eventually. Of course I have no evidence of this, other than a lifetime of paying attention to how stuff gets done.
Steve Tew should have told them don’t be stupid, bugger off and come back after they have tried it on renaming Christchurch.
-
Here we go again you complete utter fukwit Simon Arkwright link text](link url)https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/112293188/crusaders-missed-a-chance-to-take-the-lead-after-christchurch-shootings
-
@Chris said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
Here we go again you complete utter fukwit Simon Arkwright link text](link url)https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/112293188/crusaders-missed-a-chance-to-take-the-lead-after-christchurch-shootings
Marketing expert Simon Arkwright didn’t miss a chance to exploit the massacre to gain profile though .
-
The herald actually believes people are prepared to pay for this kind of garbage?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12225749
-
An appalling load of tripe from beginning to end. I counted at least a dozen factual inaccuracies in that piece. Awful click bait. One of the very worst Rugby-related articles I have ever read.
His main arsertion that NZR is intolerant of faiths other than Christianity. I think someone needs to remind Mr Gregor Paul that one of the most high-profile All Blacks of recent years is Sonny Bill Williams.
Everyone at the NZ Herald should ashamed that such a terrible, terrible article was published in their newspaper.
-
@sparky said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
An appalling load of tripe from beginning to end. I counted at least a dozen factual inaccuracies in that piece. Awful click bait.
His main arsertion that NZR is intolerant of faiths other than Christianity. I think someone needs to remind Mr Gregor Paul that one of the most high-profile All Blacks of recent years is Sonny Bill Williams.
Everyone at the NZ Herald should ashamed that such a terrible, terrible article was published in their newspaper.
He's been a bit of a tool for a while now, he just stepped things up to become a fluffybunny.
-
@jegga said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
The herald actually believes people are prepared to pay for this kind of garbage?
@sparky Geez, that's a crap article, indeed! I'm not going into the Crusaders name change nonsense in this article, but this bit is also b&llsh&t:
The issue, though, is that the game here only seems to cater for only one religion. However much everyone in authority here says they understand inclusion, diversity and respect, they understand it from a Christian perspective. There is an underlying assumption within New Zealand rugby that if players turn up with religious beliefs, they will be Christian — be it Catholic, Anglican, Protestant, Presbyterian, Baptist or whatever. The prevailing religious hegemony coupled with players who wear the Christian cross so visibly on their person deepens the perception rugby is a game founded in a Christian country, played in predominantly Christian countries, and therefore open only to Christians. It seems rugby authorities can't connect the dots — that if they allow professional players to be so overtly expressive with their Christianity that they won't have players who hold other religious beliefs knocking on the door to come play.
Gregor Paul has obviously missed how the Blues have allowed SBW to cover certain sponsor names on the sleeves of his jersey because they were contrary to Islam. He has obviously also not noticed how SBW and Ofa Tu'ungafasi say a quick prayer after scoring a try or after the game. They're muslims. Maybe he hadn't noticed that either?
SBW is probably the player most known for his faith, and its not the Christian faith.
There's nothing, absolutely nothing preventing players writing atheist, islamic, hindu or buddhist writings on their wristbands. And he has obviously also missed that a lot of players write the names of their loved ones on their bandages, other things that inspire them, or some quick reminders of what they need to focus on during the game.
-
@sparky said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
Going further back Josh Kronfeld is from a Jewish background, Sid Going is a Mormon. The claim that the NZR and the All Blacks are at all associated with religious discrimination and intolerance is false.
Sid Going was the first person that came to mind reading that article too, Mormonism is Christian but it’s on the outer extremes of it like being a Jehovahs Witness. He was a fair while ago now though .
Honestly how do the heralds management expect anyone to part with $250 a year to read garbage like that ? You can’t even line your budgies cage with it after you’re done with it .
-
@jegga said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
@sparky said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
Going further back Josh Kronfeld is from a Jewish background, Sid Going is a Mormon. The claim that the NZR and the All Blacks are at all associated with religious discrimination and intolerance is false.
Sid Going was the first person that came to mind reading that article too, Mormonism is Christian but it’s on the outer extremes of it like being a Jehovahs Witness. He was a fair while ago now though .
Honestly how do the heralds management expect anyone to part with $250 a year to read garbage like that ? You can’t even line your budgies cage with it after you’re done with it .
Todd Miller was related to the Goings and was a Mormon. Paused his career to do the door knocking and never was as good again.
So a more recent example.
-
Anyone know Rocky Khans religious background? I’m guessing dads likely a Christian but some religions like Judaism are carried on mums side and Catholics make the blokes convert to the wife’s religion.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/8238004/Rocky-Khan-a-sevens-player-with-a-difference
-
@Kirwan said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
@jegga said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
@sparky said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
Going further back Josh Kronfeld is from a Jewish background, Sid Going is a Mormon. The claim that the NZR and the All Blacks are at all associated with religious discrimination and intolerance is false.
Sid Going was the first person that came to mind reading that article too, Mormonism is Christian but it’s on the outer extremes of it like being a Jehovahs Witness. He was a fair while ago now though .
Honestly how do the heralds management expect anyone to part with $250 a year to read garbage like that ? You can’t even line your budgies cage with it after you’re done with it .
Todd Miller was related to the Goings and was a Mormon. Paused his career to do the door knocking and never was as good again.
So a more recent example.
Jared Going was even later , Eric Rush did point out he was a Mormon who liked a beer or two . Pretty much every Muslim I’ve ever met liked an occasional drink too .
-
@Stargazer said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
@jegga said in Should the Crusaders change their name?:
The herald actually believes people are prepared to pay for this kind of garbage?
@sparky Geez, that's a crap article, indeed! I'm not going into the Crusaders name change nonsense in this article, but this bit is also b&llsh&t:
The issue, though, is that the game here only seems to cater for only one religion. However much everyone in authority here says they understand inclusion, diversity and respect, they understand it from a Christian perspective. There is an underlying assumption within New Zealand rugby that if players turn up with religious beliefs, they will be Christian — be it Catholic, Anglican, Protestant, Presbyterian, Baptist or whatever. The prevailing religious hegemony coupled with players who wear the Christian cross so visibly on their person deepens the perception rugby is a game founded in a Christian country, played in predominantly Christian countries, and therefore open only to Christians. It seems rugby authorities can't connect the dots — that if they allow professional players to be so overtly expressive with their Christianity that they won't have players who hold other religious beliefs knocking on the door to come play.
Gregor Paul has obviously missed how the Blues have allowed SBW to cover certain sponsor names on the sleeves of his jersey because they were contrary to Islam. He has obviously also not noticed how SBW and Ofa Tu'ungafasi say a quick prayer after scoring a try or after the game. They're muslims. Maybe he hadn't noticed that either?
SBW is probably the player most known for his faith, and its not the Christian faith.
There's nothing, absolutely nothing preventing players writing atheist, islamic, hindu or buddhist writings on their wristbands. And he has obviously also missed that a lot of players write the names of their loved ones on their bandages, other things that inspire them, or some quick reminders of what they need to focus on during the game.
Gregor Paul displaying the awareness of a single-cell organism. How astonishing that a predominately Christian country has the majority of religious rugby players adhering to the majority faith.
-
Not sure the worth in actually reading the article. I suppose I should ...
... but the conspiracy theorist in me suggests a deeper motive to this than just to get clicks. Stuff to do with name changes, diversity and "inclusion" ... and since when did "journalists" get to write what they think as opposed to what they're paid to write?