don't know what to think

[magentaflame]

The other day i was in an Aldi store and near the checkouts i read a hoody that an older man was wearing. Down the arms read, "infidel" and on the back was " ISIS Hunting Team, Royal Australian Infidel". At first i thought, how come he hasnt been arrested yet for incitement. Then i thought, well its not against muslims persay. Then i just felt uncomfortable....... maybe its the "royal australian"bit..... i dont know. Just felt very uncomfortable.

[spot]

So you should have. Anyone seeing that in public should take a photo on their smartphone and email the picture to the police. Were it me I'd add I felt intimidated by the implied threat.

[magentaflame]

I didnt feel intimidated. What implied threat? Why would the police be involved?

[spot]

It appears to be a chap claiming to be a member of ISIS and that he hunts on behalf of ISIS, and that he has actively rejected the Christian religion to become an infidel.

[LarsMac]

spot;1509075 wrote: It appears to be a chap claiming to be a member of ISIS and that he hunts on behalf of ISIS, and that he has actively rejected the Christian religion to become an infidel.


It seemed to me that he was claiming to be on a team that hunted ISIS members. Not on a hunting club that is sponsored by ISIS.

So, I would only expect Muslims to feel intimidated.

[spot]

If the words are ambiguous I'd play safe in my interpretation. I can't see why one can be preferred to the other on simply linguistic grounds.

[LarsMac]

spot;1509091 wrote: If the words are ambiguous I'd play safe in my interpretation. I can't see why one can be preferred to the other on simply linguistic grounds.


I believe the primary clue is the "Infidel" on the arms. Most Christians do not use that term for one who does not follow the faith. It is principally used by Radical Muslims to describe Christians and Jews, these days.

But of course, you know that, already.

[spot]

LarsMac;1509108 wrote: I believe the primary clue is the "Infidel" on the arms. Most Christians do not use that term for one who does not follow the faith. It is principally used by Radical Muslims to describe Christians and Jews, these days.

But of course, you know that, already.


You imbalance your argument. You use "most" on the left, and "radical" on the right to indicate an extremist minority.

There are undoubtedly some Christians who still refer to disbelievers as Infidels, just as there are some extremists in other religions who have adopted the word when using English. It's a perfectly good word in present English usage, I'd be sad to see it made non-PC in popular use.3 [OED, after two obscure and historical definitions]. A disbeliever in religion or divine revelation generally; especially one in a Christian land who professedly rejects or denies the divine origin and authority of Christianity; a professed unbeliever. Usually a term of opprobrium.

The current definitive sermons on Methodist Doctrine in the UK, written by John Wesley, still uses "Infidel" in that sense. I'm an infidel. Then there's gentiles, heathens, pagans - all technical terms with specific aspects around a similar theme.

Most Muslims and Jews don't use these words word at all - they'd use a word from Arabic or Hebrew if they wanted to refer to someone of another nation or religion. Practically any word labeling an outsider in any language can be regarded as an aggressive insult, I'd have thought.

Most Christians don't use the term "Infidel" because most Christians don't discuss disbelief in divine revelation. Some do.

However, accepting and exulting in the label your victim would ignorantly use about you, as a provocation and a boast, seems feasible. A member of ISIS trying to intimidate English-speaking non-Muslim victims might well have "Infidel" written on his hoodie in order to scare people.

I would qualify this, if I may. Most members of ISIS have only rarely seen a Christian, much less intimidated one. Most members of ISIS intimidate and kill other Muslims in countries which are constitutionally Islamic. Practically all of the victims of ISIS have been Muslim, with the occasional minority fringe-Christian second-class citizens who haven't run for the hills fast enough.

Inviting spectacular martyrdom at the hands of non-Muslims is a tactic offered to ISIS volunteers who are surrounded by non-Muslims. It might seem a major aspect to Westerners but its sole purpose is to ignite and sustain a hatred of Muslims across Western society. The desired reaction, anti-Muslim popular sentiment, then makes more Muslims extreme in their Islamic belief, completing a vicious circle, but it's only a side-show. The reason ISIS exists, from the standpoint of extremist Sunni Islam, is to make more Muslims in Islamic countries extreme in their Sunni Islamic belief and to persecute everyone within the Caliphate who won't enthusiastically fall into line.

[LarsMac]

Well, I certainly cannot argue with your logic, there. All you say is true, within the context of your statements.

On the other hand, I hold to my assertion, based upon my personal observations within my own region where similar shirt and pull-over hoodies have been produced for the entertainment of radical right-leaning gun-toters who wear such things to bait the local "Libruls" and assorted Muslim adherents in the neighborhood.

I naturally presumed such a mindset probably exists Down Under, as well, and Fuzzy has encountered one of the local adherents to the philosophy.

Perhaps, next time she sees such a fellow, she might inquire as to his political and religious leanings.

[magentaflame]

Ummmm....i ask the woman he was with (when she was putting her trolley back) if the mans jacket was a joke jacket. She said no. I asked if it was some kind of club. (Bikies have some interestingjackets when not wearing colours) She said no......he used to be in the army.

It was definately directed toward hunting down ISIS members.

[magentaflame]

Do a search on the royal australian infidel.......legacy( they are the chaps who look after vetrans families. Have banned them from using their logo. And it seems they are bikers (not bikies) who seem to be ex serviceman.

Not a good look in a public place, but i do understand a club mentality of those who have actually fought ISIS.

Im pissed off now though, because i did ask if it was a club. I wonder why she said no but internet says differently.

[LarsMac]

magentaflame;1509120 wrote: Do a search on the royal australian infidel.......legacy( they are the chaps who look after vetrans families. Have banned them from using their logo. And it seems they are bikers (not bikies) who seem to be ex serviceman.

Not a good look in a public place, but i do understand a club mentality of those who have actually fought ISIS.

Im pissed off now though, because i did ask if it was a club. I wonder why she said no but internet says differently.


They may have a policy of members not talking about themselves in public. And she may not have actually been privy to the details.

[magentaflame]

Then dont wear their 'Colours' (so to speak) in public. As ive seen in this thread the wording can be taken in many ways and could be threatening to some members of the community.

[LarsMac]

There are a number of such shirts to be found online, and I would wonder if there actually is such an organization. People can have shirts printed up with whatever they want.

for example:

https://www.google.com/search?q=isis+hu ... t&tbm=shop

[Clodhopper]

This seems quite reminiscent of how the Hell's Angels got set up in the USA after WW2: Returning vets, missing the thrills of combat (they really do exist - blowing things up and killing baddies is a heck of a rush for some) and the tight comradeship of the platoon and in a peaceful society that frowns on blowing up the countryside and or their kids and from which they feel alienated.

It's possible they have even modelled themselves deliberately on that model. I believe it's quite well known.