John Terry Racist Remark to Anton Ferdinand

[tototoner]

Yeah but he wasn't racist to her before he battered her was he?

Way to miss the point.

thats not racism mate. racism is verbal or physical abuse because of someones skin colour/race/nationality. he didnt knock her about because she was white or swedish - it was cos he is a cnut.

Hows this racist?

Its a even stranger comment when you consider Stan collymore is half white, like pringle said the fact he is a shit has nothing to do with the colour of his skin

Who cares if he was or not ?

If roles had been reversed the race card would have been trotted out

 

[dontcallme]

Who cares if he was or not ?

If roles had been reversed the race card would have been trotted out

Not in domestic violence cases.

 

[CosmicHotspur]

We all know that Terry is a white chavvy lowlife git with a bad attitude who steals other men's women... oooh, that's kind of prejudiced ...

 

[nailsy]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2052843/John-Terry-racism-row-Anton-Ferdinand-game.html

Had to post this.

Please discuss.

In particular the very last paragraph, which states...

'So, Mr Evra and Mr Ferdinand, I know you feel insulted. But perhaps in this case you could just put up with it and get on with the game'.

​

One of the most stupid comments I've ever seen by a journo.

We all know that Terry is a white chavvy lowlife git with a bad attitude who steals other men's women... oooh, that's kind of prejudiced ...

I think we all share your prejudice though.

What I really want to know is does it make me raceist if I don't like watching long distance running? I just like the sprints.

 

[KentuckyYid]

So now mixed race people can't be racist? Why?

I mock the Irish occasionally - yet I am half Irish.

That's a question Diane Abbot can answer.

 

[Shanks]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2052843/John-Terry-racism-row-Anton-Ferdinand-game.html

Had to post this.

Please discuss.

In particular the very last paragraph, which states...

'So, Mr Evra and Mr Ferdinand, I know you feel insulted. But perhaps in this case you could just put up with it and get on with the game'.

​

Shocking, that someone can be that dismissive of racist insults. And even more shocking it's printed.

Who cares if he was or not ?

If roles had been reversed the race card would have been trotted out

Massively presumptious, and somewhat racist in itself.


For me the whole thing stinks.

Terry says something towrad Ledley King and what ever is said causes all our black players to react very very angrily. Rumours are it was a racist comment.

We see live on TV what Terry called Ferdinand.

Ferdinand has admitted he didn't hear the remark, so when AShley Cole went up to him and said Terry wants to speak with you, he was unaware that there was a racist remark made. It was only after he saw it on TV, he understood.

He has said Terry's view on things, is very different to his own.

I'm more interested why the FA haven't investigated the previous claims of racism, yet sponsor and support the kick racism out of football campaign. Shocking stuff to be honest.

 

[Shanks]

Whenever Terry is mentioned, I think of this young lady...

 

[KentuckyYid]

I thought all reports from the DM get summary dismissed due to the source? Funny how some carry weight but most others get attacked because of the source. What exactly is the criteria for allowing a DM report in?

 

[dontcallme]

I thought all reports from the DM get summary dismissed due to the source? Funny how some carry weight but most others get attacked because of the source. What exactly is the criteria for allowing a DM report in?

A DM report into what?

 

[KentuckyYid]

A DM report into what?

Anything.

You know what I meant though.

Truth is when DM do report a racist attack on whites it gets the usual 'It's the DM so it must be lies'.

I've seen the same ole crap spewed out on here for years. And no I'm not a DM reader either but that's besides the point.

I'd still like to know the criteria for letting a DM report/article, or whatever in.

 

[rich75]

Anything.

You know what I meant though.

Truth is when DM do report a racist attack on whites it gets the usual 'It's the DM so it must be lies'.

And where exactly has that happened on these forums?

I've seen the same ole crap spewed out on here for years. And no I'm not a DM reader either but that's besides the point.

I'd still like to know the criteria for letting a DM report/article, or whatever in.

The reason people say the Mail is full of shit is because it is.

http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/

 

[KentuckyYid]

The reason people say the Mail is full of shit is because it is.

http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/

I stopped reading after the first sentence "The gang behind The-Sun-Lies, Mailwatch, Expresswatch and numerous other media watching blogs are having Their second annual Media Watch Meetup."

Obviously they're only interested in a Media Witch Hunt of the right wing press. It's a pity they haven't included Guardian & BBC into their Media Witch Hunt. Exposing all the media for the liars they are instead of just the media to the right would have given them more credibility. I did have a quick look around at the site as I wanted to see what 'numerous other media' entailed. Turns out there weren't any other media at all, just Sun, Mail & Express witch hunts. They lied in their first sentence which doesn't really say much for the rest of it.

I wonder how they get their funding? Probably some Marxist movement would be my guess.

 

[SlickMongoose]

Never thought i'd see anyone step in defend that Daily Mail statement. Crazy world.

 

[KentuckyYid]

Whose defending it?

I simply asked the question what is the criteria for letting a DM report/article in without getting the usual "It's the DM so must be lies".

IMO ALL the media are liars. The DM is no more or no less of a liar than say BBC.

 

[rich75]

I stopped reading after the first sentence "The gang behind The-Sun-Lies, Mailwatch, Expresswatch and numerous other media watching blogs are having Their second annual Media Watch Meetup."

Obviously they're only interested in a Media Witch Hunt of the right wing press. It's a pity they haven't included Guardian & BBC into their Media Witch Hunt. Exposing all the media for the liars they are instead of just the media to the right would have given them more credibility. I did have a quick look around at the site as I wanted to see what 'numerous other media' entailed. Turns out there weren't any other media at all, just Sun, Mail & Express witch hunts. They lied in their first sentence which doesn't really say much for the rest of it.

I wonder how they get their funding? Probably some Marxist movement would be my guess.

Except of course, if you had kept reading you'd see that they have a go at the indie in the course of one of the articles as well.

And you didn't answer the question in bold

 

[dontcallme]

Whose defending it?

I simply asked the question what is the criteria for letting a DM report/article in without getting the usual "It's the DM so must be lies".

IMO ALL the media are liars. The DM is no more or no less of a liar than say BBC.

But the reason it was brought in this time was because one of their commentators was telling the alleged victims of racial abuse to quit their whining because racial abuse was worse 30 years ago.

The article was brought in because people find it unbelievable that any newspaper could publish such crap.

 

[rich75]

I stopped reading after the first sentence "The gang behind The-Sun-Lies, Mailwatch, Expresswatch and numerous other media watching blogs are having Their second annual Media Watch Meetup."

Obviously they're only interested in a Media Witch Hunt of the right wing press. It's a pity they haven't included Guardian & BBC into their Media Witch Hunt. Exposing all the media for the liars they are instead of just the media to the right would have given them more credibility. I did have a quick look around at the site as I wanted to see what 'numerous other media' entailed. Turns out there weren't any other media at all, just Sun, Mail & Express witch hunts. They lied in their first sentence which doesn't really say much for the rest of it.

I wonder how they get their funding? Probably some Marxist movement would be my guess.

And clearly you don't understand the opening line. The Mail,Sun and Express sites are all part of the same group. That doesn't exclude there being other media watch blogs that aren't related to the Mail one

 

[KentuckyYid]

And clearly you don't understand the opening line. The Mail,Sun and Express sites are all part of the same group. That doesn't exclude there being other media watch blogs that aren't related to the Mail one

Clearly? Clearly it's you who doesn't understand the opening line. "The gang behind The-Sun-Lies, Mailwatch, Expresswatch and numerous other media watching blogs are having Their second annual Media Watch Meetup."

Read it again, they claim to be the gang behind the 3 named media and numerous other media watching blogs

They lied in their first line. Probably beat the DM at their own game there...

 

[lilywhitecurtis]

Whose defending it?

I simply asked the question what is the criteria for letting a DM report/article in without getting the usual "It's the DM so must be lies".

IMO ALL the media are liars. The DM is no more or no less of a liar than say BBC.

There's clearly untrue though isn't it? The journalistic standards of the BBC are massively taken for granted in this country. Yes, they have been abused, and the BBC has without doubt been shown to have it's flaws but comparing it to the most reactionary and bias newspaper in the country is very unfair. The BBC doesn't actually have many left leaning sensibilities when you think about it.

I do agree with you though, people do seem to have double standards about the validity of the DM's reporting. When they hound an unpopular player it seems some are all too willing to believe it.

 

[rich75]

Clearly? Clearly it's you who doesn't understand the opening line. "The gang behind The-Sun-Lies, Mailwatch, Expresswatch and numerous other media watching blogs are having Their second annual Media Watch Meetup."

Read it again, they claim to be the gang behind the 3 named media and numerous other media watching blogs

They lied in their first line. Probably beat the DM at their own game there...

Nope , try reading again . No lie , just your wilful misunderstanding .