Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Owen Jones embarrasses himself on Sky News debate about Orlando watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I pittied him, like a little boy lost in the wilderness after everything he believed and thought for was clashing together in disharmony.

    He got a mauled by labour MP Frank Field just last week on question time who schooled him on workers rights. Owen looked like he was going to cry yet could not argue with this Eurosceptic Labour MP who had stood with Corbyn for decades long before owen jones was a seed in his fathers gonads
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    What are these links? Go on tell me. Saying you 'support them' is not a link. Show me the evidence that this attack was planned or organised by IS.
    He had self radicalised online, he had been heard saying how he wanted to martyr himself in a confrontation with the law by coworkers, he has ties to an American who traveled to Syria and became a suicide bomber, there is also the fact that a leader in Isis called for supporters to do something like this so to ignore that Isis was the part of the motivation is ignoring part of the problem.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    And how was that homophobia inspired and where did it come from, and I mean that very specific type of homophobia which has nothing to do with protesting gay marriage but actively believing you should go out and kill as many gays as possible? Was it Trump? Kim Davis? Or more likely the type of homophobia encouraged by Islamic extremists - demanding that gays are killed for being sinners, and which the terrorist expressly affiliated himself with?

    I am really not sure why you are trying to wilfully ignore the obvious Islamist element here. I am not even one of those saying "omg it's all Islam's fault!". I am recognising that it is the particular, ISIS inspired Islamist homophobia which encourages this sort of horrible behaviour.
    I'm not ignoring the Islamist element.
    But to suggest this was an attack primarily on the west as opposed to a homophobic attack specifically targeted at gay people is ludicrous. It was primarily a homophobic attack.

    what you're trying to do is make out that it wasn't really primarily homophobic.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I'm so confused, what exactly is the point the hosts are trying to make? Owen is saying it was a homophobic attack but the hosts are saying it was just a normal terrorist attack?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    He had self radicalised online, he had been heard saying how he wanted to martyr himself in a confrontation with the law by coworkers, he has ties to an American who traveled to Syria and became a suicide bomber, there is also the fact that a leader in Isis called for supporters to do something like this so to ignore that Isis was the part of the motivation is ignoring part of the problem.
    That's all hearsay. Where is the proof that this attack was coordinated and organised by IS?

    What does 'has ties' mean? Be specific.

    The only 'link' to Isis is a comment of support to the police after he butchered these people, he was a very disturbed individual.


    Again though, you're trying to make out that this wasn't treacle a homophobic attack.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Proximo)
    I'm so confused, what exactly is the point the hosts are trying to make? Owen is saying it was a homophobic attack but the hosts are saying it was just a normal terrorist attack?
    Pretty much. Despite the fact it was carried out by a homophobe and targeted specifically at gay people.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    That's all hearsay. Where is the proof that this attack was coordinated and organised by IS?

    What does 'has ties' mean? Be specific.

    The only 'link' to Isis is a comment of support to the police after he butchered these people, he was a very disturbed individual.


    Again though, you're trying to make out that this wasn't treacle a homophobic attack.
    I have said it was homophobic but I have also commented on what you want to ignore, the Islamist side of this attack, yes his previous actions are irrelevant.

    So you think there is no relation to an attack in the name of Isis and Isis calling for supporters to attack?

    His ties include his self radicalisation online watching Isis videos, links to a suicide bomber and his statements.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    This interview is just shocking.

    I'd be pretty pissed off since it isn't seen as a homophobic attack(which it clearly is) and the guy being seen as a lunatic(just like how when a white guy crashes a plane he's a lunatic and when a muslim man does it he's a terrorist) but yeah the reactions are pretty poor. I'd have said my point and just carried on with the conversation though.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    I'm not ignoring the Islamist element.
    But to suggest this was an attack primarily on the west as opposed to a homophobic attack specifically targeted at gay people is ludicrous. It was primarily a homophobic attack.

    what you're trying to do is make out that it wasn't really primarily homophobic.
    The problem when people say "it was purely a homophobic attack" is that it pigeonholes it into the same broad category as Kim Davis and the cake controversy and fails to address the specific, deep rooted problem both the West and the Middle East have with Islamist homophobia, which is why I think it should be described as Islamist homophobia or at least recognised that it is homophobia inspired by ISIS-style Islamism.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Nah he did the right thing. I would have liked him to have stayed because he had some really important things to say, but there was no point if the other two were just going to talk over him.

    (Original post by Proximo)
    I'm so confused, what exactly is the point the hosts are trying to make? Owen is saying it was a homophobic attack but the hosts are saying it was just a normal terrorist attack?
    ^^ this pretty much sums it up

    Also, I don't think this has been posted, but it's definitely worth reading... http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ando-sexuality
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Just because someone is gay doesn't mean they're not homophobic, the self-hating Jew is a famous stereotype but it's present in any marginalised group. He may have been gay but that doesn't mean he can't have opposed homosexuality and agreed with what IS stand for.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    But then when a black guy shoots up other black guys in an area full of black people is he self hating? Is it xenophobic what he's doing or is it just gang warfare/mental instability?

    Interesting if the guy is gay though but if he was gay he didn't have to tell ISIS that he was gay if he is pledging allegiance to them anyway.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    The problem when people say "it was purely a homophobic attack" is that it pigeonholes it into the same broad category as Kim Davis and the cake controversy and fails to address the specific, deep rooted problem both the West and the Middle East have with Islamist homophobia, which is why I think it should be described as Islamist homophobia or at least recognised that it is homophobia inspired by ISIS-style Islamism.
    Homophobia is homophobia, racism is racism
    Etc.

    It was an attack carried out on the gay community.

    I wouldn't limit this to IS. Saudis Arabia execute gay people yet we support them. Let's have consistent outrage.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    I have said it was homophobic but I have also commented on what you want to ignore, the Islamist side of this attack, yes his previous actions are irrelevant.

    So you think there is no relation to an attack in the name of Isis and Isis calling for supporters to attack?

    His ties include his self radicalisation online watching Isis videos, links to a suicide bomber and his statements.
    It was a homophobic attack, not a general attack on the west. It's that simple.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    It was a homophobic attack, not a general attack on the west. It's that simple.
    So you want to ignore the rest of the motivation so you can say how bad gays have it?

    You are seriously over simplifying it and really saying oh it's just a homophobic attack doesn't help anyone
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think the point he was trying to make is that by labelling the attacker as a "lunatic," you are essentially placing him in a similar bracket to the mentally ill.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    nobody 'owns' this attack - but it directly affects the LGBT community and by refusing to classify this as a hate crime against LGBT I can totally understand why he walked off - I would have.

    * if you're not LGBT it is probably a bit harder to understand the personal nature of this attack, although obviously it affects all of us in very hard-hitting and different ways
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheonlyMrsHolmes)
    I missed the part where he "embarrassed himself"...

    They undermined the fact that it was a homophobic attack and everything they said was speculation, I understand Owen's frustrations.
    Maybe the part where he said you can't possibly understand if you're not gay or the snide little comments, and who storms off a TV debate because someone disagrees with you lmao
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    So you want to ignore the rest of the motivation so you can say how bad gays have it?

    You are seriously over simplifying it and really saying oh it's just a homophobic attack doesn't help anyone
    That's pretty much it though. It was an attack on the LGBT community influenced by the homophobic ideology of radical Islam (i.e. ISIS).

    The guy pledged allegiance to ISIS and his dad said he also hated gay people. He could have killed any non-Muslim Westerner, regardless of sexuality, but decided to target a gay club.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    I despair that so many otherwise sensible people support Jones. It's as though everyone has decided not to think. Anyone who watches that clip without bias will see the other two panellists did nothing wrong.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    That's pretty much it though. It was an attack on the LGBT community influenced by the homophobic ideology of radical Islam (i.e. ISIS).

    The guy pledged allegiance to ISIS and his dad said he also hated gay people. He could have killed any non-Muslim Westerner, regardless of sexuality, but decided to target a gay club.
    I have admitted multiple times the attack was homophobic, it was also caused by radical Islam I believe it needs to be said that this was both.

    To ignore either part is a bad position to take as it doesn't fully describe what has happened.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: June 16, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.