|
Post by oldie on Sept 2, 2021 9:39:02 GMT
I would never see that as a "reasonable" explanation. That is just an extreme version of xenophobia. What next? The entire 1st team must be made up of Bristolians? Fear of strangers, who would have thought it. Well, istm if a Gashead buys the club everyone would say, well of course he bought the club, he's a Gashead. If someone from Swindon bought the club, you might ask exactly the same question as if someone from San Diego, or Shanghai, or Kinshasa had bought us, 'I wonder why?' I feel like this is a reasonable response. Wondering why someone from Swindon might want to buy us is not extreme xenophobia. That's a bit of a "straw man" Antonio. If the owner is white British I do wonder if some of those consistently criticising the current owner would do the same, at least with the same illogical arguments over financing.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Sept 2, 2021 9:41:10 GMT
That's a bit of a "straw man" Antonio. No it's not. ffs.
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Sept 2, 2021 9:46:25 GMT
That's a bit of a "straw man" Antonio. No it's not. ffs. Ok then...🧐🙃
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Sept 2, 2021 9:47:08 GMT
Jesus, that was an embarrassing thread.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Sept 2, 2021 10:06:48 GMT
Let me be clear. I am in no way accusing swissgas of making racist comments. To my knowledge Swissgas has never made a racist comment in his life. I have never read anything by Swissgas which can be said to be racist. I apologise if that is the impression I gave. However, there is a usual hardcore of Wael skeptics, Swiss is prominent among those, and the narrative from those Wael skeptics gives the strong impression that Wael not being British is factorial in their dislike of his ownership of the club. Thanks for clearing that one up LJG. I know that Swiss has actively tried to encourage overseas investment into Rovers in the past so I think that you might have misjudged him on this one. Just to add after a quick search on this forum I found references to "Fake Sheikh" so the phrase isn't exclusive to the other forum. Have a great day and hope they find the low life who publicly racially abused Wael. The fake sheikh phrase is certainly not exclusive there or here. From memory I have also seen it on Facebook I believe.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Sept 2, 2021 11:15:15 GMT
Jesus, that was an embarrassing thread. It is. I might delete it.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Sept 2, 2021 11:21:39 GMT
Jesus, that was an embarrassing thread. It is. I might delete it. Please don't. Some people need to see what they've written, imo.
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Sept 2, 2021 11:33:49 GMT
That's a thumping good read...
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Sept 2, 2021 11:40:32 GMT
It is. I might delete it. Please don't. Some people need to see what they've written, imo. More than a few posters should be in the "missing members" thread. It's an awful thread to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by lavalamp on Sept 2, 2021 13:01:30 GMT
Please don't. Some people need to see what they've written, imo. More than a few posters should be in the "missing members" thread. It's an awful thread to be honest. This thread isn't really any better. 🤦♂️
|
|
|
Post by buckaroo on Sept 2, 2021 19:50:50 GMT
The 2017 thread is certainly highly critical of the owners, and I suppose insulting, but there’s no racism in what I saw (I admit I only managed about five pages).
To be honest, the main complaint seems to be about the “fake sheikh” term in the title. Though again that is intended as an insult, I don’t think it’s intended to be racist. The insult is in the “fake” bit, as the implication is that someone is pretending to be very rich when they’re not - a conman if you like. In a way the “sheikh” bit on its own is a compliment - ie a sheikh being perhaps a Saudi Prince is expected to be very rich, while impersonating one is fraudulent. Indeed, as I recall, the original “fake sheikh” was a British journalist conning British marks who were happy to break the rules to get some cash.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Sept 2, 2021 20:02:26 GMT
The 2017 thread is certainly highly critical of the owners, and I suppose insulting, but there’s no racism in what I saw (I admit I only managed about five pages). To be honest, the main complaint seems to be about the “fake sheikh” term in the title. Though again that is intended as an insult, I don’t think it’s intended to be racist. The insult is in the “fake” bit, as the implication is that someone is pretending to be very rich when they’re not - a conman if you like. In a way the “sheikh” bit on its own is a compliment - ie a sheikh being perhaps a Saudi Prince is expected to be very rich, while impersonating one is fraudulent. Indeed, as I recall, the original “fake sheikh” was a British journalist conning British marks who were happy to break the rules to get some cash. Nah.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Sept 2, 2021 20:06:46 GMT
The 2017 thread is certainly highly critical of the owners, and I suppose insulting, but there’s no racism in what I saw (I admit I only managed about five pages). To be honest, the main complaint seems to be about the “fake sheikh” term in the title. Though again that is intended as an insult, I don’t think it’s intended to be racist. The insult is in the “fake” bit, as the implication is that someone is pretending to be very rich when they’re not - a conman if you like. In a way the “sheikh” bit on its own is a compliment - ie a sheikh being perhaps a Saudi Prince is expected to be very rich, while impersonating one is fraudulent. Indeed, as I recall, the original “fake sheikh” was a British journalist conning British marks who were happy to break the rules to get some cash. Oh dear.
|
|
|
Post by axegas on Sept 2, 2021 20:31:31 GMT
The 2017 thread is certainly highly critical of the owners, and I suppose insulting, but there’s no racism in what I saw (I admit I only managed about five pages). To be honest, the main complaint seems to be about the “fake sheikh” term in the title. Though again that is intended as an insult, I don’t think it’s intended to be racist. The insult is in the “fake” bit, as the implication is that someone is pretending to be very rich when they’re not - a conman if you like. In a way the “sheikh” bit on its own is a compliment - ie a sheikh being perhaps a Saudi Prince is expected to be very rich, while impersonating one is fraudulent. Indeed, as I recall, the original “fake sheikh” was a British journalist conning British marks who were happy to break the rules to get some cash. It’s not a complimentary remark, look at the context that the remark is often situated in, one of criticism and insult. Why even bring ethnicity into it? It’s totally irrelevant and this is something that if said to Wael’s face would obviously make him feel very uncomfortable about. You might be right that it’s not overt racism per say, but it’s one step removed from it and is something that we could do without as a fanbase especially with the rise of online abuse on social media these days.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Sept 2, 2021 20:40:15 GMT
The 2017 thread is certainly highly critical of the owners, and I suppose insulting, but there’s no racism in what I saw (I admit I only managed about five pages). To be honest, the main complaint seems to be about the “fake sheikh” term in the title. Though again that is intended as an insult, I don’t think it’s intended to be racist. The insult is in the “fake” bit, as the implication is that someone is pretending to be very rich when they’re not - a conman if you like. In a way the “sheikh” bit on its own is a compliment - ie a sheikh being perhaps a Saudi Prince is expected to be very rich, while impersonating one is fraudulent. Indeed, as I recall, the original “fake sheikh” was a British journalist conning British marks who were happy to break the rules to get some cash. It’s not a complimentary remark, look at the context that the remark is often situated in, one of criticism and insult. Why even bring ethnicity into it? It’s totally irrelevant and this is something that if said to Wael’s face would obviously make him feel very uncomfortable about. You might be right that it’s not overt racism per say, but it’s one step removed from it and is something that we could do without as a fanbase especially with the rise of online abuse on social media these days. Precisely, it’s often not overt these days . But it’s still pretty obvious the way it’s intended.
|
|
|
Post by buckaroo on Sept 2, 2021 20:44:01 GMT
The 2017 thread is certainly highly critical of the owners, and I suppose insulting, but there’s no racism in what I saw (I admit I only managed about five pages). To be honest, the main complaint seems to be about the “fake sheikh” term in the title. Though again that is intended as an insult, I don’t think it’s intended to be racist. The insult is in the “fake” bit, as the implication is that someone is pretending to be very rich when they’re not - a conman if you like. In a way the “sheikh” bit on its own is a compliment - ie a sheikh being perhaps a Saudi Prince is expected to be very rich, while impersonating one is fraudulent. Indeed, as I recall, the original “fake sheikh” was a British journalist conning British marks who were happy to break the rules to get some cash. It’s not a complimentary remark, look at the context that the remark is often situated in, one of criticism and insult. Why even bring ethnicity into it? It’s totally irrelevant and this is something that if said to Wael’s face would obviously make him feel very uncomfortable about. You might be right that it’s not overt racism per say, but it’s one step removed from it and is something that we could do without as a fanbase especially with the rise of online abuse on social media these days. I don't think you've read what I said before you posted your response. It's clearly an insult as it's calling someone a conman or fraudster. But insulting an individual isn't racist per se (if you're going to use Latin, at least get it right). Calling someone a sheikh isn't an insult, but calling someone fake is.
|
|
|
Post by axegas on Sept 2, 2021 20:49:14 GMT
It’s not a complimentary remark, look at the context that the remark is often situated in, one of criticism and insult. Why even bring ethnicity into it? It’s totally irrelevant and this is something that if said to Wael’s face would obviously make him feel very uncomfortable about. You might be right that it’s not overt racism per say, but it’s one step removed from it and is something that we could do without as a fanbase especially with the rise of online abuse on social media these days. I don't think you've read what I said before you posted your response. It's clearly an insult as it's calling someone a conman or fraudster. But insulting an individual isn't racist per se (if you're going to use Latin, at least get it right). Calling someone a sheikh isn't an insult, but calling someone fake is. I did read what you said. The thing is it’s an insult, as you admit, followed by a reference to Wael’s ethnicity. Therefore it gives off the impression that it’s an insult directed towards his ethnicity. If that’s not the intention then the person saying it should think a little harder about how it’s going to come across and whether it was something they’d be willing to call Wael in person.
|
|
|
Post by buckaroo on Sept 2, 2021 21:09:23 GMT
I don't think you've read what I said before you posted your response. It's clearly an insult as it's calling someone a conman or fraudster. But insulting an individual isn't racist per se (if you're going to use Latin, at least get it right). Calling someone a sheikh isn't an insult, but calling someone fake is. I did read what you said. The thing is it’s an insult, as you admit, followed by a reference to Wael’s ethnicity. Therefore it gives off the impression that it’s an insult directed towards his ethnicity. If that’s not the intention then the person saying it should think a little harder about how it’s going to come across and whether it was something they’d be willing to call Wael in person. I think what whoever called WAQ a fake sheikh meant, was that he had pretended to be more wealthy than he was. Ironically he didn't - it was simply ignorant supporters who assumed any Arab owner would be fabulously wealthy like a Saudi prince (a sheikh being Arab royalty).
Anyway, going back to my original point, I didn't see any real racism in the thread (leaving aside the wording of the title). A lot of dissatisfaction with the owners, yes, but that's common to almost any football forum, whatever the race of the owner.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Sept 2, 2021 21:23:32 GMT
I did read what you said. The thing is it’s an insult, as you admit, followed by a reference to Wael’s ethnicity. Therefore it gives off the impression that it’s an insult directed towards his ethnicity. If that’s not the intention then the person saying it should think a little harder about how it’s going to come across and whether it was something they’d be willing to call Wael in person. I think what whoever called WAQ a fake sheikh meant, was that he had pretended to be more wealthy than he was. Ironically he didn't - it was simply ignorant supporters who assumed any Arab owner would be fabulously wealthy like a Saudi prince (a sheikh being Arab royalty).
Anyway, going back to my original point, I didn't see any real racism in the thread (leaving aside the wording of the title). A lot of dissatisfaction with the owners, yes, but that's common to almost any football forum, whatever the race of the owner.
Nah.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Sept 3, 2021 5:07:01 GMT
I did read what you said. The thing is it’s an insult, as you admit, followed by a reference to Wael’s ethnicity. Therefore it gives off the impression that it’s an insult directed towards his ethnicity. If that’s not the intention then the person saying it should think a little harder about how it’s going to come across and whether it was something they’d be willing to call Wael in person. I think what whoever called WAQ a fake sheikh meant, was that he had pretended to be more wealthy than he was. Ironically he didn't - it was simply ignorant supporters who assumed any Arab owner would be fabulously wealthy like a Saudi prince (a sheikh being Arab royalty).
Anyway, going back to my original point, I didn't see any real racism in the thread (leaving aside the wording of the title). A lot of dissatisfaction with the owners, yes, but that's common to almost any football forum, whatever the race of the owner.
I agree. I didn't see much if anything racist posted in that thread and if I had I would have removed it at the time. I accept that the thread title could definitely appear racist but reading it in the context of the OP it *could* have been an insult.
|
|