You you literally turned to suggesting im a racist and white supremacist in the other thread on the basis of debating points fairly. Anyone who isn't would be outraged by that surely.
You then later said do i think he is, no of course not. Bit late for that. Funnily enough as soon I I showed a video on gb news of black people agreeing with me which showed it wasn't an obvious race issue everyone black agrees with, but largely left vs right too.
What I actually said was
So why don’t they comply with the wishes of people who largely oppose the movement and change what has become a hugely effective slogan as well as an influential factor in driving positive social change?
Why should they? Why should a movement built on striving for an end to white supremacy bow to the will of white supremists?
It seems pretty clear to me I was talking in general terms about "White Supremacists" as opposed to accusing you as an individual of being a White Supremacist. Clearly you have chosen to read more into the statement than was intended, but there is no accusation aimed at you personally at all.
Do I think JJ is a white supremacist? No that would be ridiculous….Though I do think the presumption that we might “have a better idea about how to challenge these issues and here’s a black person who agrees with us to prove it” is a part of that in built and presumed ‘supremacy’.
I think I was pretty unequivocal in making my position clear in regard to any assumed accusation aimed at you personally.
One false move and I'm off running to teacher? So you admit it was false thats good. Not a good look, what you seem to be saying is when you overstep the mark you shouldn't run off an tell on me but you seem to want to try and label others with a different view, probably knowing that shuts down debate you didn't agree with.
Id say labelling people for having an honest debate is abhorrent, we've seen before how it can even ruin peoples lives, when left wing mobs descend on them and put pressure on all around then to sack them etc.
No I'm clear about what I said, I am merely making reference to your snowflakery. The way in which you are adopting this 'so called' far left trait of desperately digging to find something to be offended by. Why not focus on what was actually said, instead of trying to shut down debate or adopt this 'cancel culture' type approach of claiming 'offence' where it doesn't really exist and certainly wasn;t intended?
Aboit the advisors, I was saying what the guy above said about who knows the why it took 3 days to say it wasn't actually racial graffiti. I wasnt saying thats the case just most things these days wouldn't surprise me.
You cant go to into the minds of people who call a black person an idiot or something and say, well is he doing that because he's black or because he's missed a penalty.
Otherwise its not a fair society, you could never criticise a black player for something totally outside of race.
It should have been called out straight away and clarified. 3 days of rolling news before they knew, nah sorry thats too tong to read a word on the wall and at least say what it said.
So you wouldn't be surprised if an advisor to a Black player had cooked up a plan to maintain a false narrative concerning racist abuse (which by the way there is plenty of evidence of) in order to shield the player from non-racist abuse for missing a penalty? You see to me, that's some kind of batshit style conspracy theory and I genuinely question what would motivate someone to go to those kind of lengths in order to essentially put the blame back onto the victims themselves....
Your right it wouldn't be a fair society if we couldn't criticise someone without it being about their race.... But we can do that and it happens all the time and nobody is suggesting that normal everyday criticism is racist.
Of course, in a fair society, the Police and Criminal Justice System migh well seek to categorise criminals in different sub-sets than on racial grounds too. And an British Citzens might also stop thinking about crime in terms of race and thereby associating an 'individual' based on a single characteristic....
You criticis the reporting of the mural, but the grafitti had been blanked out and was subject to a Police investigation. So nobody, including the GB News channel, was in a position to report on the apparent fact that the grafitti was "Not
believed to be racially motivated"... It is entirely possible that the Police may not have read it themselves, but taken advice of someone else as to what it said... It's also possible that the event has been suppressed in order to avoid further racial tension.
The point I've tried to make is there was a lot of tweets from outside the UK, a small number of idiots within as usual. Potential bots involved. Media frenzy without at times giving us all the facts or correcting news quickly. Also a reason some will always link the BLM gesture to the political group the same name.
That all I have said.
I've always said anyone found to have done this should be severely dealt with.
How much clearer can I be.
Hopefully this brings society out better and maybe it will in some respects, but I think these things where you take a tiny sample of idiots and it dominates news and makes a country look bad, I dont see that having only a positive effect. Its very hard to stop 1 idiot on twitter ruining it for everyone. 1 bot, 1 shady organisation.
It leaves everyone looking in at each other with a fine tooth comb looking for this bigger problem that largely doesn't exist outside a tiny few I reckon and if these threads are anything to go by people turning on each other.
I think the media could have handled it better, of course its covered but bring more balance with those facts, more good news with the good stories of cohesion due to the euros more.
The reason I asked the question is that you seem to have flitted around on this thread and others, making a series of unrelated posts (The Metropolitan Police one being a prime example). So I wanted to be clear on exactly what we were talking about and what your point was and then I could try to address it.
So I agree that it appears at this stage that a lot of the tweets are from outside the UK or at least that appears to be the line that is now being pushed in the Mainstream media. There have clearly been a number of arrests made, there was the Portsmouth FC matter and then we have this theory about bots too...
So I suppose a number of possibilities exist...
There may be a concerted effort to play down the issue... (unlikely, but given the pressure the government had suddenly come under, not impossible)
There may be bots involved... I think this is a reasonable assumption, the Russians for example have form for trying to stir up social tensions...
The Accounts themselves might be disguised, through Proxy servers etc... If you are an intentional right wing type posting racist material, then I'd expect you to hide your internet identity...
Whichever way you look at it though, it certainly happened and it wasn't a nice expoerience for the Players or their families, who are at the end of the day still victims of vile racist abuse, regardless of where it has come from.... A fact that still seems to have escaped those who have been intent on playing this down.
I think most fair minded people would recognise that the UK is by and large an extremely tolerant and decent society. Of course we don't tend to tolerate racism or extreme politics (far right or left).... We have gone a long way to tackling racism and that applies to Football as well as other areas in our society, but it doesn't mean that it doesn't still exist, nor that we shouldn't challenge it when it rears it's head.
