adios

Coloured(2): dated or offensive: wholly or partly of non-white descent. Bling-bling: US informal: expensive, ostentatious clothing and jewellery, or the wearing of them. Source: My Electronic OED thingy.

Isn't inciting racial hatred a crime?

I think you're typing this in full Nazi regalia tbh.

One is white. One is black. i havent seen Carr described needlessly as a 'potato picking tosser' or anything else related to his Irish blood and hence there is no real need to explain it. Is there? 49299[/snapback] I've called him a miserable, grumpy Paddy bastard many's a time. Well as long as you've never experienced it, that's ok. Irish people suffer bigotry in the UK btw.

He does play for Ireland though and he has Irish roots 49298[/snapback] I hope he doesn't play for Ireland any more. I've been cursed with the fecker twice, I really will always be grateful to Souness for getting rid, if for little else.

Apparently O'Brien isn't Irish. But Carr is, it was you who used the Baba/Carr comparison, bez?

Fuck, so he is. Replace 'O'Brien' with 'Carr', he's been used in the same context.

Some of the stuff I've said about O'Brien would make your ears bleed, there were times I hated him when he played for us and I got the impression that was the general feeling. JJ was always a big arguing point, an ever decreasing crowd waiting for his potential to start paying off and the people that were sick of waiting. I'm not sure of JJ's lifestyle but if it was anything like Dyer's then bling would not be an unfair comment, O'Brien's less bling than my granny. Also why are you so obsessed with racism only being a black thing? O'Brien is Irish you know.

Is that because they aren't really as capable as their peers but got the job due to positive discrimination? 49116[/snapback] No, neither. There are cases (many of them) where BLACK people /women/black women etc (those we know from the statistics published by the DTI,EOC are discrimated against) DO THE SAME JOB (exactly the same job) and get paid less for it. Now, this happens regularly enough to put a 20% disparity between women and men doing EXACTLY THE SAME JOB across the UK. Nowt to do with ability. Lots to do with prejudice. The point is, if British society is capable of this then what makes NUFC any different in its ability to tolerate Black players and treat them equally? Now, MOST people are rational. Most people also have some prejudice of some sort somewhere, however much we have rightly pushed it away. Given Andy Coles return to SJP and the bile (much of it involving the word BLACK) and the ridiculous comments made about players recently: Compare these comments from forums: JJ (break legs/die/bling bastard etc) with AOB (shit). The vitriol is very different. The same with Baba/Carr. Dyer when not playing (waste of spunk) and Bowyer when not "playing". Whether we care to see it or not there is an undercurrent. Not as visible as it used to be but a bigger issue than some who care to acknowledge. For every exception to the rule there is another example we can mention. Nobody has said that SJP has turned into Burnley. Not have we said that every poster is Nick Griffin. However, racism is on the rise nationally in many ways. Politically, the NF/BNP are gaining some ground. Tensions go with it. To ignore it is fine. We have had that bullshit line from several people. So why do we have an EOC? KROF? Anyway, at least some people have decided to think (for a change) Next time you or the people sat next to you at the match or the pub slag Stephen Carr, ask yourself whether it was preceded with a moniker related to his ancestry and culture. did they do the other lads the same courtesy? One strike and out is the racism rule in football grounds. Until we have eradicated the problem entirely we need to keep on eye on it and perhaps some people will notice we arent as free from it as many suggest. 49258[/snapback] That's a pretty sizable response to a joke comment! I agree with you that society has to be pro-actively anti-racist for quite a long time to come but there is a whole other side to this argument. If you just say racism is wrong and let's put together some blanket policies to stop it the problems you end up with are just as bad. Labelling things as racist which aren't racist, making people afraid to discuss the issues, hysteria and quite possibly positive discrimination. Here's food for thought, why not just positively discriminate for poor, underprivileged people? Starting with better education and public health.

No, the problem is the grief they'll get from others. Is that grief racist? Yes. Is it wrong to protect someone you love from that? No. I'm not saying it's great that things are that way, but recognising that racism is a real problem (on both sides) and protecting people from it is not racism. PS EDIT: On the positive discrimination in football comment, have a look at the starting 11 of a lot of clubs, is it really neccessary?

You see I can't see how you've turned a father being worried about his daughter getting hassled about going out with a black fella into 'irrational hatred'. I'd call that pretty sensationalist. I was trying to point out that labelling things like that racist, stands in the way of decent debate. I didn't say the other but very clearly - I meant: Fathers are often irrational in their protection of their daughters but to see a problem and protect their daughter from it is rational. On the working class issue, I'm not looking at statistics, I'm speaking from personal experience. I have a working class background (in Ireland) and it's the worst racism I've experienced. I have hung around with all classes in a number of countries (including England) and that hasn't changed my opinion. I think fear is produced by ignorance, which in turn produces hatred. I don't feel the working classes are given the same opportunities for education. It's not really controversial though, I don't think. Just seen your PS, if you do that again, I'm pretty sure Ctrl-Z will fix your problem.

0.0001 <-- I just want to know who that bloke is.

Gemmill's going to love that! It's either something bred into you by society from a very early age or you see them as more obviously out of your gene pool so you don't like them. Probably a combination of the two. Alot of similarities with racism.

I honestly have no idea what point you're trying to make there. 49150[/snapback] He's talking to choc or myself about the comparison made between a racist murder and a crime of passion. What if genocide in darkest Africa at a young age had convinced you that all black people were savages? That would be messed up, but can anyone kill for any reason without serious psychological problems (unless it's state sponsored of course)? I've known racists, but a racist murderer? There has to be a lot of hatred brewing fo that. Same goes for victims of adultery.

There's also an interesting point in whether they are wrong to do so. They're on a budget, they have to take short-cuts, make assumptions. If some of those are racial. Like a black man, aged 20-30 shot dead on this street is 40% likely to be involved in gangland activity, is that wrong? The whole system's fucked, it's difficult to point fingers. Anyway, I notice we've already managed to steer off the new topic.

I read that as commendable at first glance! I think that's how I feel about it. Being a racist murderer may be no more significant than being a liberal or conservative murderer. I'm not equating racism to political preference, before anyone starts.

That's an easy question, no they wouldn't. I wouldn't get too caught up in media hyseria, or what we should probably call social hysteria, it's a good topic but not the one at hand. If I brutally murder someone because they are black am I any worse than someone who brutally murders someone for sleeping with their wife? I'm not convinced.

It's not neccessarily ignorant not to want a daughter to go out with a black guy. I have friends who've had black partners and they've never had an easy time from either 'side'. Father's always want the best for their daughters, often irrationally, but that's perfectly rational. And I really have to question what you say about the working classes being the least racist

Would that have been any less disgusting had it been a white on white crime?

Is that because they aren't really as capable as their peers but got the job due to positive discrimination?

reductionist tbh.

Positive discrimination is a tough one. You can see the argument for giving someone a leg up who's had a tougher time of it to even things out a bit in the long run. I'm thinking more about the US than the UK, where I'm not sure the problem is nearly as severe. But ultimately are you not just prolonging negative discrimination by 'unfairly' helping them? I don't think I'd do it in the UK.

For being a bully and a bigot, mainly.

I must have a read of that. I always give the bloke a hard time, especially about that, but I should really see what hew has to say about it.

Would it be mean if I said I was sun bathing all this week? It certainly would be if you had to imagine the state of me...