|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 18, 2022 21:07:03 GMT
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 . . .. BS ^ Rafiq was publicly reprimanded in same tones. The BBC, ITV, Sky and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all of the media (incl the Daily Misery) reported 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. It's not against the law to call you a whingeing racist cunt either but I'm sure it would offend you if I did (and to be clear, I haven't). There's always a balance to be struck between offending/harming and limiting free speech but a good place to start is to accept that not everyone thinks like you (or me for that matter) but everyone has a right to have their feelings fairly considered. And I suggest you are underestimating how many non whites are seriously upset by white people caricaturing them in ways such as black face. So if a caricature is upsetting to someone that should be considered wrong. That will blot out a whole industry in terms of cartoons. If I caricature Jimmy Durante I put a plastic cup in my mouth as per Eric Morecambe to highlight his physical attribute of a large nose, why should any physical attribute be off limits. Most people with small noses have caricatured big noses unmercilessly. We are in danger of not upsetting anyone and life will be a very dull place indeed with hardly a smile to be raised. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 18, 2022 21:20:53 GMT
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 . . .. BS ^ Rafiq was publicly reprimanded in same tones. The BBC, ITV, Sky and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all of the media (incl the Daily Misery) reported 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. You can call me whatever you like on here, it's makes not a jot of difference to me. Why on earth you think it would is something of a mystery. It may be different if you said it to my face, but tbh, I don't think you're that stupid. Could be wrong lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 18, 2022 22:09:00 GMT
Only Red could make a fight out of a post where I basically agreed with his main point  |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 18, 2022 22:53:50 GMT
Only Red could make a fight out of a post where I basically agreed with his main point Stop blubbing, you big girls blouse. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 19, 2022 0:26:05 GMT
Only Red could make a fight out of a post where I basically agreed with his main point Stop blubbing, you big girls blouse. Oh dear tantrums, Rouge is annoyed |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 19, 2022 0:45:41 GMT
Stop blubbing, you big girls blouse. Oh dear tantrums, Rouge is annoyed Perish the thought, mildly amused would be more accurate. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 19, 2022 1:13:58 GMT
Point of order.
It is against the law to be grossly offensive as a certain Count Dancular found out.
While I've got my pedant's hat on I'd like to also point out that spades are for digging and shovels are for shovelling so B4 should have been advised to put the spade down and not the shovel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 19, 2022 1:30:56 GMT
Point of order. It is against the law to be grossly offensive as a certain Count Dancular found out. While I've got my pedant's hat on I'd like to also point out that spades are for digging and shovels are for shovelling so B4 should have been advised to put the spade down and not the shovel. LOL, very good. And borrowing your pedant's hat for a moment; offence, or perceived offence is an emotion is it not? So where in your opinion, is the line crossed from offensive, to grossly offensive? |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 19, 2022 1:40:12 GMT
Point of order. It is against the law to be grossly offensive as a certain Count Dancular found out. While I've got my pedant's hat on I'd like to also point out that spades are for digging and shovels are for shovelling so B4 should have been advised to put the spade down and not the shovel. LOL, very good. And borrowing your pedant's hat for a moment; offence, or perceived offence is an emotion is it not? So where in your opinion, is the line crossed from offensive, to grossly offensive? The location of the line is to be determined in a court of law as Mr Dankular (not a real count) found to his cost. Well not his cost exactly as his court costs and fine were likely paid for by some of the unsavoury organisations which supported his perceived right to be grossly offensive. When one of the guys fighting your corner is the odious Tommy Robinson (not his real name) you are in the wrong corner. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 19, 2022 2:12:57 GMT
LOL, very good. And borrowing your pedant's hat for a moment; offence, or perceived offence is an emotion is it not? So where in your opinion, is the line crossed from offensive, to grossly offensive? The location of the line is to be determined in a court of law as Mr Dankular (not a real count) found to his cost. Well not his cost exactly as his court costs and fine were likely paid for by some of the unsavoury organisations which supported his perceived right to be grossly offensive. When one of the guys fighting your corner is the odious Tommy Robinson (not his real name) you are in the wrong corner. Whether you consider Tommy Robinson to be odious, or not, rather depends on what you know about him. Of course, whenever a certain section of people hear the name Tommy Robinson, they are compelled to scream racist, and as they scream racist, they look around to make sure everyone else in their group can see they are enthusiastically screaming racist. It's how an easily manipulated mob act, see the Hitler Youth. In some circles hating Tommy Robinson is not a choice, it's a cause. Yet people who so vigorously condemn him, don't just not know his story, but are uninterested in his story. This is called ignorance. Tommy Robinson has bigger balls than most people on this forum that's for sure and if I were to meet him, I would have no problem shaking his hand and buying him a pint. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 19, 2022 2:30:10 GMT
His story is that of a convicted football hooligan who went on to commit mortgage fraud and was refused entry to the US when he was found to be entering under a false name with a false passport.
Odious is the least of how I would describe the miserable human being.
Not someone that should be a hero of anyone IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 19, 2022 4:16:12 GMT
His story is that of a convicted football hooligan who went on to commit mortgage fraud and was refused entry to the US when he was found to be entering under a false name with a false passport. Odious is the least of how I would describe the miserable human being. Not someone that should be a hero of anyone IMO. I thought you might be a bit more clued up. Tommy Robinson is doing, or was doing what the government should have been doing, what we all should have been doing. Exposing Pakistani rape gangs, euphemistically known as 'grooming gangs'. I've gone into this in some detail, and you are typical of the majority, you don't know what goes on. It doesn't affect you so why should it bother you. Is that because you don't care? I wouldn't have thought so. Is it because you don't know the extent of the horrific torture these Pakistani 'men' inflicted on girls as young as 12 years old. Quite possibly. I say this in absolute sincerity, read a book called 'Easy Meat', anyone with a shred of decency, will weep. People don't know what goes on because it's racist to comment. Have a listen to this, Andrew Norfolk exposed grooming gangs and was absolutely vilified by the MSM. As far as I'm concerned Tommy Robinson has bigger balls than any of the political class who have overseen the scandal that is the cover up of Muslim grooming gangs in this country. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 19, 2022 8:30:47 GMT
How is standing outside a court where a rape gang is under trial for being a rape gang exposing anything?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2022 9:13:55 GMT
BS ^ Rafiq was publicly reprimanded in same tones. The BBC, ITV, Sky and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all of the media (incl the Daily Misery) reported it. It's not against the law to call you a whingeing racist cunt either but I'm sure it would offend you if I did (and to be clear, I haven't). There's always a balance to be struck between offending/harming and limiting free speech but a good place to start is to accept that not everyone thinks like you (or me for that matter) but everyone has a right to have their feelings fairly considered. And I suggest you are underestimating how many non whites are seriously upset by white people caricaturing them in ways such as black face. So if a caricature is upsetting to someone that should be considered wrong. That will blot out a whole industry in terms of cartoons. If I caricature Jimmy Durante I put a plastic cup in my mouth as per Eric Morecambe to highlight his physical attribute of a large nose, why should any physical attribute be off limits. Most people with small noses have caricatured big noses unmercilessly. We are in danger of not upsetting anyone and life will be a very dull place indeed with hardly a smile to be raised. Some people want the totalitarian puritan system to hide behind and have already submitted their application. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Nov 19, 2022 9:20:33 GMT
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. Rafiq's complaints seem pretty trivial to me, especially compared to Rafiq's anti-semitic tweets. It seems that Rafiq was called a "Pakistani" sometimes which is an abbreviation like "Brit". Why should he complain? Rafiq himself called Gary Ballance a "Zimbo" and suggested that he should "fuck off back where he came from". In fact Rafiq had a very good career at Yorkshire for a not very good spin bowler, including being made club captain. As a result of Rafiq's complaints a lot of members of the Yorkshire cricket club were sacked (on very little evidence) and they put a "Pakistani" in charge for some reason. It has cost the club millions in lost revenue and rafiq was awarded £200k IIRC. Not bad for a paranoid "Pakistani" who saw a chance of making money and took it as his career was over. He also, with a couple of muslim mates, accused Vaughan of saying "There are too many of you lot here, we must do something about it", which Vaughan has always denied - but he has lost his jobs with the BBC as a result and has hardly been heard from since the allegations. Guilty until proved innocent? Rafiq has made a lot of money out of this though. I wonder why any cricket club would now want to employ "Pakistani muslims". It's a ticking time bomb. One word out of place and you're accused of "racism". And any accusation of racism against whites is immediately believed by the wokery. |
|
