An innocent mistake to make.....

[WTFH]

Thanks for the concise responses.

So, could you elaborate exactly why you posted the following;
https://forums.contractoruk.com/gene...ml#post2567867

Specifically the 1st & 3rd images

also, could you suggest some alternate purposes (in your head) of those floats, wrt your point #3 - 'deliberately offend', as it appears you supported anti Cameron & Putin, offensive protest floats, by posting pictures of them.

Do you know the difference between satire and offensive?

Image 1: Trump riding the symbol of the republican party while shooting himself in the foot. That is satire based on reality
Image 2: Putin posing topless brandishing a gun (as he does) while bringing down a jet. This is satire based on real events.
Image 3: Cameron with a pigs head on his lap. This is satire based on real events.

[WTFH]

Wonder if Darmy and/or WTFH, support the right to post[1] that cartoon[2] or not?, given the pictures in their posts, linked above.

[1] - Free speech
[2] - Freedom of expression

You probably want to ask the guy who said these things recently:

That would be objectively obscene and grossly offensive, to most of the general public.

Not surprised you have suggested it though.

Of course not, but that's not what we're talking about.

We're talking about protests, with the one suggested by you being grossly offensive and obscene.

I have in the past, but can't remember if it was on here or not.

So, why do you think small children should see images of bestiality and execution?
(Since that would be a by-product of your suggested protest blimp)

[Whorty]

What should the repercussions for Fabricant be, in your view?,
and also,
What should the repercussions be for the trump/Bear float creator/approver be?

Free speech is what I'm sticking up for, not him personally.

What if it was a sheep/goat, as has been suggested - is it all good now?
Apply for permission and just expect Sadiq to approve it?

If someone believes he made a statement, which was incitement to violence, or directly threatening violence - the police are available you know, there's laws against that kind of nasty behaviour.

Why would a sheep/goat be relevant to Khan? The bear with Trump is indicative of the Russian Bear (a universal image of Russia is a bear) shafting Trump as it is suggested that Russia propped him up to win the white house and now they have a hold over him. They haven't randomly chosen something to shaft Trump, the bear is very specific.

Same with the pig for Cameron - this relates to a very specific and followed news story. You remember the one?

There however is no link to Khan and pigs. He wasn't propped up in his bid to win the London Mayor role by local pig farmers from Wanstead Flats or Hackney Marshes. Had Khan, for example, being linked to something dodgy in Australia then having him being shafted by a kangeroo would be as acceptable as Trump being done by a bear.

The pig, however, is an anti-Muslim symbol, so to have it specifically shafting a Muslim is a very real racist image. They could have chosen any animal, cat/elephant/giraffe, but no, they chose a pig specifically and only because Khan is Muslim.

Now do you understand why this is racist and should not be defended. Or are you genuinely as thick as you portray? Or maybe not thick, just a good honest racist who thinks this is OK

[Grasser73]

Why would a sheep/goat be relevant to Khan? The bear with Trump is indicative of the Russian Bear (a universal image of Russia is a bear) shafting Trump as it is suggested that Russia propped him up to win the white house and now they have a hold over him. They haven't randomly chosen something to shaft Trump, the bear is very specific.

Same with the pig for Cameron - this relates to a very specific and followed news story. You remember the one?

There however is no link to Khan and pigs. He wasn't propped up in his bid to win the London Mayor role by local pig farmers from Wanstead Flats or Hackney Marshes. Had Khan, for example, being linked to something dodgy in Australia then having him being shafted by a kangeroo would be as acceptable as Trump being done by a bear.

The pig, however, is an anti-Muslim symbol, so to have it specifically shafting a Muslim is a very real racist image. They could have chosen any animal, cat/elephant/giraffe, but no, they chose a pig specifically and only because Khan is Muslim.

Now do you understand why this is racist and should not be defended. Or are you genuinely as thick as you portray? Or maybe not thick, just a good honest racist who thinks this is OK

It's anti-Muslim but I fail to see it as racist when Islam isn't a race.

[meridian]

It's anti-Muslim but I fail to see it as racist when Islam isn't a race.

Does that make you any less of a bigot?

[vetran]

It's anti-Muslim but I fail to see it as racist when Islam isn't a race.

of course its racist, they just redefined racism.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig...b_8591660.html

not sure where Cat Stevens fits in or Mike Tyson if its cultural racism, maybe the catholic kiddy fiddlers could have tried it? Decrying catholic criminals is racism.

https://www.ranker.com/list/famous-p...elebrity-lists.

[meridian]

of course its racist, they just redefined racism.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig...b_8591660.html

not sure where Cat Stevens fits in or Mike Tyson if its cultural racism, maybe the catholic kiddy fiddlers could have tried it? Decrying catholic criminals is racism.

https://www.ranker.com/list/famous-p...elebrity-lists.

(David Attenborough voice)

“Emboldened by his fellow racists and bigots, vetran slides out from under his rock to provide some whataboutery to fit his bigoted agenda...”

[NotAllThere]

It's anti-Muslim but I fail to see it as racist when Islam isn't a race.

Biologically, there is only one human race, so the term racist should mean nothing. But so what? Hate filled anti-Muslim images are still as execrable as hate filled images of people according to their skin colour or ethnic origin.

Except for gammons of course. They're funny and a perfectly acceptable target for ridicule.

If you prefer, when you see the word "racist" you can mentally substitute it for "bigotted, small-minded, hate-filled, ignorant bigot". HTH. Or, according to meridian, "vetran".

[vetran]

(David Attenborough voice)

“Emboldened by his fellow racists and bigots, vetran slides out from under his rock to provide some whataboutery to fit his bigoted agenda...”

I have no issue with calling it Faithism which it might be. But moving the goal posts by redefining racism as something that offends people that believe in non visible beings hardly helps the situation.

[vetran]

Biologically, there is only one human race, so the term racist should mean nothing. But so what? Hate filled anti-Muslim images are still as execrable as hate filled images of people according to their skin colour or ethnic origin.

Except for gammons of course. They're funny and a perfectly acceptable target for ridicule.

If you prefer, when you see the word "racist" you can mentally substitute it for "bigotted, small-minded, hate-filled, ignorant bigot". HTH. Or, according to meridian, "vetran".

I'm good with using bigot to describe someone who shared or created this rather unpleasant image. Can we use similar for those that organised the Blimp?

I just want equality and clear definitions.

I wonder what would have happened if Sadiq Khan had been portrayed with a blood covered knife in his hands standing over a young boy? Would that have been acceptable?