|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 17, 2022 1:50:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Nov 17, 2022 9:21:46 GMT
Absolutely crazy. How is that racist?
It's funny how it's always white people who are accused of racism. That bastard Azeem Rafiq who got a lot of money off Yorkshire Cricket Club for accusing them of racism was later found to have posted quite a lot of antisemitic stuff on twitter but it hardly got any coverage and he basically got away with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Nov 18, 2022 11:11:51 GMT
The Woke Midland Bankers may get a shock in the future the people they are hell bent on silencing controlling will only take some much before they get very angry, and make their opinions known, they may even come out in large numbers to confront, these odious politically motivated morons to task.
It may take time, but it could happen
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 18, 2022 11:38:23 GMT
Absolutely crazy. How is that racist? It's funny how it's always white people who are accused of racism. That bastard Azeem Rafiq who got a lot of money off Yorkshire Cricket Club for accusing them of racism was later found to have posted quite a lot of antisemitic stuff on twitter but it hardly got any coverage and he basically got away with it. No because Azeem was also reprimanded (in October), the Daily Mail carefully didn't mention that. But reprimanding Hales was well OTT. There was no racist intent in his wearing 'blackface', at that time most people didn't realise it can cause offence and he's long ago apologised. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 18, 2022 13:12:35 GMT
Absolutely crazy. How is that racist? It's funny how it's always white people who are accused of racism. That bastard Azeem Rafiq who got a lot of money off Yorkshire Cricket Club for accusing them of racism was later found to have posted quite a lot of antisemitic stuff on twitter but it hardly got any coverage and he basically got away with it. No because Azeem was also reprimanded (in October), the Daily Mail carefully didn't mention that. But reprimanding Hales was well OTT. There was no racist intent in his wearing 'blackface', at that time most people didn't realise it can cause offence and he's long ago apologised. Steve, steppenwolf didn't say, Rafiq was not reprimanded, he said ...
"Rafiq who got a lot of money off Yorkshire Cricket Club for accusing them of racism was later found to have posted quite a lot of antisemitic stuff on twitter but it hardly got any coverage and he basically got away with it"...
Which is correct. There is no way Rafiq was ever going to be publicly reprimanded in the same withering tones as a white player. Rafiq's racism was essentially played down, no big deal nothing to see hear folks. On the other hand, the ECB publicly accused Alex Hales of racist and discriminatory conduct. It's laughable, if only the ECB could see it. You claim dressing up as Tupac Shakur "could have caused offence", I mean really? If it caused offence to some thin skinned woke warrior, then so be it, big deal. In spite of woke types who constantly look for offence, it is not against the law to offend. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 18, 2022 13:32:02 GMT
As usual that's not true though is it.
Raffiq's complaints were pretty disturbing and few right-minded people would suggest that the failings seemingly endemic in Yorkshire Cricket Club should not be corrected.
The accusations against Raffiq were well publicised and suggest he is himself not a pleasant person but that doesn't detract or justify the actions of Yorkshire towards him or others. As it happens I understand there are further accusations against Raffiq's conduct emerging now.
Raffiq is an ex-player over whom the ECB have little or no jurisdiction. Alex Hales is a current player - indeed a member of the T20 squad last week - over whom they do. Do you see the difference?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2022 13:56:14 GMT
Absolutely crazy. How is that racist? It's funny how it's always white people who are accused of racism. That bastard Azeem Rafiq who got a lot of money off Yorkshire Cricket Club for accusing them of racism was later found to have posted quite a lot of antisemitic stuff on twitter but it hardly got any coverage and he basically got away with it. It isn't surprising, though. Under the Woke dogma only white people can be racist.
You may see headlines that contradict that, but they're most likely click bait:
Muslim faces jail over race-hate attacks on Orthodox Jews
Looking into the article there's no mention of any race-hate charges: "District Judge John Law on Thursday found Qureshi guilty of inflicting religiously aggravated grievous bodily harm and two counts of religiously aggravated assault by beating."
His Muslim/minority status may have saved him from any additional racism charges.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 18, 2022 14:03:11 GMT
FFS you yourself highlighted the relevant bit. I have put it in bold for you so you dont miss it
"District Judge John Law on Thursday found Qureshi guilty of inflicting religiously aggravated grievous bodily harm and two counts of religiously aggravated assault by beating."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2022 14:08:30 GMT
FFS you yourself highlighted the relevant bit. I have put it in bold for you so you dont miss it "District Judge John Law on Thursday found Qureshi guilty of inflicting religiously aggravated grievous bodily harm and two counts of religiously aggravated assault by beating." I don't think you understood, even though I made it quite clear that it wasn't treated as racism, despite the headline claiming he was facing jail for race-hate. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 18, 2022 14:29:16 GMT
It was treated as religiously aggravated rather than racially aggravated GBH as in law Jewish people are not a race and hence cannot be racially prejudiced against - they are part of a religion. There is little or no practical difference between the two - indeed if you attacked a muslim man because of his religion rather than because of his skin colour, that too would be religiously aggravated GBH in law.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2022 14:37:15 GMT
It was treated as religiously aggravated rather than racially aggravated GBH as in law Jewish people are not a race and hence cannot be racially prejudiced against - they are part of a religion. There is little or no practical difference between the two - indeed if you attacked a muslim man because of his religion rather than because of his skin colour, that too would be religiously aggravated GBH in law. You are still failing to understand - the headline stated "Muslim faces jail over race-hate attacks on Orthodox Jews". I'm unsure why you're trying to prove me wrong when I had already stated that it wasn't treated as such.
Here's a previous case: Moment Jewish man, 64, is knocked unconscious after being punched in ‘racist attack’
The accusation of racism is a media invention.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 18, 2022 14:41:35 GMT
The media sees racially motivated and religiously motivated hatred as two peas in the same pod and doesn't differentiate.
The law, in order to avoid racist scumbags getting off on a technicality, has to be more precise linguistically
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2022 14:59:16 GMT
The media sees racially motivated and religiously motivated hatred as two peas in the same pod and doesn't differentiate. The law, in order to avoid racist scumbags getting off on a technicality, has to be more precise linguistically This was my original point. However, under Woke dogma only the white majority can actually be racist, which was my other point. This is because the system throughout Europe is based on white beliefs/structures. Non-white/minority people cannot be racist because they aren't the majority and have had little influence in these beliefs/structures.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 18, 2022 15:10:39 GMT
No with respect it is the diametric opposite of your point.
Which you then compounded by providing an example where, rather than being exempt from racially/religiously motivated hate crime legislation, an ethnic minority man (in this case a muslim) had just been convicted of just that.
I think I'd stop digging now....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2022 15:20:21 GMT
No with respect it is the diametric opposite of your point. Which you then compounded by providing an example where, rather than being exempt from racially/religiously motivated hate crime legislation, an ethnic minority man (in this case a muslim) had just been convicted of just that. I think I'd stop digging now.... I never said they were exempt from a religiously motivated crime or any other non-racially motivated crimes. You are now doing what the media is doing and conflating the two, which is dishonest.
|
|
