- John Terry Verdict
I will say one thing. Being white trying to explain away words spoken is ridiculous.
3 Muslim friends were deeply affected by white people name calling in their youth. One of which made me think oh.
Two black (law abiding) friends genuinely despise Police from their experiences so I can try but not fully undetstand. However my mate Zebi once said “Mark you are white, how can you understand the undercurrent of often daily looks, avoidance nevermind in your face insults”?
For someone, in the public eye to acknowledge saying the words is disgusting.
If I went upto a Syrian in the workplace and refered to them as a **** Arab I should be fired by my employer.
Why didnt Ferdinand etc hit or shout about it?
Yes there are alot of black players but look at alot of the Stone Island wearing **** etc.
**** hateful game.Posted 7 years ago
My post has not disappeared smuttiesmith – it’s on the previous page.
And why do you claim that I have stated that the “wrong verdict was reached” ?
I have said no such thing. In fact I have not expressed any opinion on the verdict whatsoever.
Why don’t you try to pay a little more attention eh ?Posted 7 years ago
I wish I knew enough about the law to be able comment on these threads, or any for that matter. 😕Posted 7 years ago
its raining out side again.Posted 7 years ago
Yep and still in this world can you call someone a **** black **** if you are a promising footballerPosted 7 years ago
smuttiesmith cheers bra’. No harm.
I’m off to listen to more weekend-playlist.
I thought Binners post would have concluded this thread nicely but alas, it must be g & t time for the mods.
It’s all getting off-topic and shite.
No racism, no excuse.
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sonYFxHHvaM[/video]Posted 7 years ago
I think it sets a horrible precedent if you sentence someone for the thoughts in their head and the words that come out of their mouth.
I agree, so I hope the mods don’t ban me when I post up what I think of you and your comment you **** ******* **** 😉
Joking apart, come off it you can’t really be saying that its OK to be incredibly offensive with complete impunity surely???? However, having said that, I really don’t think this case warranted the court time it has received. There are much worse things that go on in this world that don’t get anything like the attention that this has had legally or publicity wise. Frankly, I think a sensible early statement from Terry stating that in the heat of the moment he reacted to Ferdinand in a less that adult fashion followed by an unreserved apology, with that followed by an acceptance of said apology from Ferdinand would probably have done far more good for both players, race relations and football, than resorting to law would ever achieve. As per usual the only real winners are the lawyers. Now that frankly is something that really is offensive!Posted 7 years ago
ernie_lynch – Member
I didn’t sit through the court case and list to the evidence nor did I witness it first hand like a lot of you guys did. I only saw what was reported by the media so I don’t have an opinion. I mean it would be absolute folly to come to a difinitive conclusion without listening to the all the evidence rather than just the bite size segments they can fit on the TV or in the papers….. wouldn’t it???
Oh hold on a moment, this is STW! Have at it internerds.
The only “definitive conclusion” I have come to smuttiesmith, since you are clearly referring to me, is that unlike 16stonepig, I believe racism should remain illegal.
What “definitive conclusion” did you think I had come to ?
Racism isn’t illegal. It is only illegal to voice or act upon your racist thoughts. How do they get inside your head and convict you of being a racist without you putting those thoughts or deeds into action? Even then you aren’t convicted of being racist only of committing a racist act.
I also think that your comparison between someone being a racist and peadophile was ill judged and offensive. A racist can be re-educated, a pedophile cannot.Posted 7 years ago
Anyway. Beer o’clock. Anyone makes a racist remark in earshot of me would get re-educated. Good night.Posted 7 years ago
Can Marxists be re-educated too?Posted 7 years ago
I also think that your comparison between someone being a racist and peadophile was ill judged and offensive.
So why didn’t you say that, instead of accusing me of saying that the wrong verdict was reached ? (although I made no comparison between the two and merely applied 16stonepig’s logic) )
It seems to me that you read my post after commenting on it.
And btw : “Racism isn’t illegal“. Racism is illegal. Inciting racial hatred is both racist and illegal.Posted 7 years ago
And btw : “Racism isn’t illegal”. Racism is illegal. Inciting racial hatred is both racist and illegal.
And there in lies the failure of your argument. Inciting racial hatred etc etc is illegal and I agree that it should be. Being a racist isn’t illegal, only acting in a racist way is illegal. You are convicted based on your deeds, not on your thoughts.
And btw I dont believe I have accused you of saying that the wrong verdict was reached. I don’t think I have even given an opinion on whether the correct verdict was reached or not have I? In fact I think I have gone out of my way to state that unless you (or anyone else) was there to witness it first hand or attended court and listened to all the evidence then your (or anyone else’s) opinion on whether John Terry is guilty or not isn’t worth the internet paper that opinion is written on.
Perhaps next time I will make a new post for each point I am trying to make.Posted 7 years ago
Marxism? The origins of Marxism saved the world from National Socialism.Posted 7 years ago
Racism is definitely illegal smuttiesmith, contrary to your claim.
….unless you (or anyone else) was there to witness it first hand or attended court and listened to all the evidence then your (or anyone else’s) opinion on whether John Terry is guilty or not isn’t worth the internet paper that opinion is written on.
TBH smuttiesmith you appear to be struggling following a thread on a mtb forum, so I wouldn’t hold out much hope for you being able to follow who said what in court. You very clearly suggested in your first post that I had expressed an opinion on the verdict, despite your now furious backtracking. I did no such thing.Posted 7 years ago
Is that a no then?Posted 7 years ago
What a complete waste of money don’t they have more pressing things to do .
Perfectly OK for 50,000 people to chant who’s that **** in the black at the ref as often happens I suppose .Posted 7 years ago
“I find pedophilia utterly disgusting. I just don’t think I could ever argue that it should be illegal” ?
Paedophilia isn’t illegal.
I’m guessing you don’t know what it means?Posted 7 years ago
I can’t understand how calling someone a bad word is OK, but calling someone the same bad word and putting their perfectly acceptable to use) colour first is racist. Was the colour wrong?
John Terry is an oik of the first order, but no case to answer in my opinion.Posted 7 years ago
Marxism? The origins of Marxism saved the world from National Socialism.
The proponents of which have murdered, tortured and imprisoned more people than any other !Posted 7 years ago
I’m guessing you don’t know what it means?
But I guessing that you know what it means to be a sad pedant ?
Perhaps you would prefer a better structured sentence ?
Something along the lines of “I find those who engage in pedophilia utterly disgusting” might better satisfy your anal-retentive requirements ?Posted 7 years ago
Interesting when you read the full context:
ernie, you obviously don’t know what pedant means either?
The whole point about being pedantic is that the extraneous detail is superfluous, just supplied for the sake of it. My post therefore doesn’t qualify. The misuse of the word paedophile by the media (and then consequently by the great unwashed) is silly.
Legal definition: Someone adult who finds ‘children’ (i.e. humans under the arbitrary legal age of consent in any country – so anything from under 12 to under 21) sexually attractive. Under this definition I’m fairly sure the vast majority of people (asexuals excluded) have at some time or another been a paedophile. I fancied the **** out of my sisters mate who was 15, so I’m one!
Correct definition: Someone adult who finds ‘children’ (i.e. pre-pubescent humans…because to have sexual feelings for someone incapable of breeding would be unnatural?) sexually attractive. Under this definition I’m fairly sure the vast majority of people (asexuals excluded) HAVE NOT at some time or another been a paedophile. I’ve never been one, and I’m pretty sure I never will be.
It does not mean someone who attacks children, abuses children, rapes children, looks at images of abuse etc etc (although those people may, or indeed may not, be paedophiles)…remember, not all ‘sex crimes’ have sex as their motive, some are about power and control.Posted 7 years ago
Have we just reached 101 posts,about somebody who is overpaid calling somebody else who is overpaid (comapred to us workers) a naughty name, along with the huge cost and publicity it has given both clubs and all the chav newspapers that have been sold.
A totally and useless waste of time and effort.
But then i dont give a toss for football or the ones who kick a ball to earn a wage.Posted 7 years ago
The misuse of the word paedophile by the media (and then consequently by the great unwashed) is silly.
But your waffling pedantic post is not silly at all ? 😀
You go for it mate !Posted 7 years ago
I’m with tucker in that it seems to me (and I’ll own up to being white before I say this) Terry obviously meant to use the f***ing c*** as an insult to unsettle his opposition what difference does it make that he used the factually correct adjective “black” in between? I can understand it becoming racial if this line of insult is taken further or escalates but it seems to have been isolated and blown out of all proportion by the media for their own ends since. While I in no way condone racist behaviour, I personally think the meally mouthed excuse and defence that he was simply repeating the words implausible and do him and his club even more harm than if he’d simply admitted f**king up in the heat of the moment. I don’t think this incident and the subsequent handling of it has done anything but harm to race relations.
Then again I’m not effected by it in any way so what do I know? Can anyone shed any light on the wider context?Posted 7 years ago
In the wider context, Speeder, I live in a community where 3rd generation men of Indian descent racially abuse 1st generation men of Pakistan origin and 2nd generation Eastern European teenagers racially abuse recently arrived civil-war fled Georgians.
I feel lost in it all, let alone the ingrained -and community absolved- Sectarianism implied in certain areas.
I just go back to “One Love” and hope it all concludes well, if ever, in my lifetime.Posted 7 years ago
Money talks it seems, especially 2 grand a day legal ones…
Another footballer gets off with something, don’t know why everyone’s surprised really – hopefully karma will look after him….Posted 7 years ago
ernie_lynch – Member
Olympics is near
What verdict did you expect
Well I expect the magistrate to be nobbled by the London 2012 Organising Committee of the Olympic Games of course !
I’m not sure why, but I am confident that is the correct answer.
Well thats my gut feeling on the outcomePosted 7 years ago
Another footballer gets off with something, don’t know why everyone’s surprised really – hopefully karma will look after him….
I doubt it. If you look at the things he’s done so far and what karma has done to him, you’d argue that karma is a fickle bitch. Or, indeed, non-existantPosted 7 years ago
The topic ‘John Terry Verdict’ is closed to new replies.