Tue 8th September 2009, 8:17pm
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Tue 8th September 2009, 2:39pm)
It's the ArbCom's fault for being imprecise. Jayjg should have been topic-banned from "Zionism-related issues" and that would have covered all potential areas of disruption.
Well I think the implication here is that the arbcom ruling was actually too precise
Sure, perhaps they could have just topic-banned him from all conflicts involving the modern State of Israel and any other part of the Middle East As Defined By The Bush Administration
(see previous thread
), plus all conflicts between Jews and Muslims in any location from 622 AD up to whatever year the real messiah
is supposed to arrive... but they didn't.
In my opinion the complainant recognized the tendency of western media and audiences to paint predominantly islamic ethnic groups with the same brush (Berbers, Kurds, Pashtuns, Persians, Punjabis, Turks (?!)... all shades of "Arab" right? Go back to bed, America...) and tried to exploit it.
Highlighted for posterity:
QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 2nd May 2009, 2:21pm)
I noticed during the Iraq war that US commentators sometimes found it difficult to distinguish between Islam and the Arabian Middle East, even though most Muslims live well outside that region. And many pundits seemed to falsely assume that Afghanis and Iranians were Arabs. The largest population of Muslims can be found in Indonesia.
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Tue 8th September 2009, 3:24pm)
Iran is a significant player in the regional conflict between Israel and it's immediate Arab neighbors. Any editing by Jayjg relating to Iran would either be used a coat rack to hang negative material or as credibility building exercise to facilitate the same.
Fair points but as far as I know he wasn't doing that. The diff cited was part of a quite surreal discussion
about holocaust denial where some user wants to remove the "anti-semitism" category on the basis that "not all holocaust deniers are anti-semitic, for example Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claims not to be".
Ahmadinejad has stated that he is not antisemitic and is clearly a holocaust denier. I believe that his "not antisemitic" statement is absurd. However, it's apparently a valid source on Wikipedia's Juan Cole page. I will use that as my source. Jwh335 (talk) 01:41, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
You need to review WP:NOR. Just because Ahmadinejad says he's not antisemitic, it doesn't mean Holocaust denial isn't antisemitic. Please find reliable sources which state "Holocaust denial is not antisemitic". Jayjg (talk) 01:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Even accepting that Ahmadinejad is inherently part of the Israel–Palestine conflict (allegedly desiring to "wipe Israel off the face of the earth
"), and that for these reasons maybe Jayjg shouldn't mention his name at all, you have to admit the other user did rather bait him into that tangent.