tottingham hotspurs racists

[Elvoz]

Hey... 'you white honkey you', haven't heard that since 'love thy neighbour' was on the tv. That show had the coloured gentleman always getting the better of his neighbour the daft white fella, it was so funny, although i must have been all of ooooh 9yrs old, or younger.

I remember when he got the white guy to dance around a tree at midnight naked, singing something like ....'onky wonky me white honky', to get rid of an African Voodo spell he though the guy had put on him.

No...surely i was older than 9yrs....no way was it that long ago...no waaayyyyyyyyy.

happy days

does make you feel a bit old though

[Vermilion]

happy days

does make you feel a bit old though

Very very old.

And er..Wise.....................

[zimbo]

Don't be such a wetwang!

Don't stick your head up your arses because you think you may be seen as a racist. Years ago, statistics showed in London that most street muggings were by black kids. Not all black kids are street muggers. Yes, some are actually white!

But, the copper was SACKED for saying it because dicks jumped on his back.

This meant the problem was ignored and swept under the carpet and things for black kids have NOT improved.

WHY?

Because people are so scared of being called racist, they don't want to see whats going on.

To my mind, if you ignore a problem or a fact you don't like because of someones race or skin tone, THEY are the racist. THEY are the ones showing discrimination.

And as I say, thanks to the attitude of people like that, NOTHING has changed.

Whilst I would love to delve deeper into your skewed ramblings, which read like something that an indignant Dail Mail sub-editor might cough up over his Cornfalkes, I think BFG has summed it up more than adequately. Particularly here:

When he is basically saying that black people = crime, then anyone but a complete racist or internet hero trying to challenge some imaginary case of 'political correctness' would and should find that quite offensive.

There are undeniable problems within certain black communities, linked, amongst other things, to the development of unhelpful cultural expectations and aspirations, peer pressure and the need for a greater number of positive role models.

However, underlying these factors, as BFG points out, lies the inescapable fact that black and minority ethnic communities are more likely to be the victims of social and economic inequality, with fewer educational or employment opportunities, and a greater instance of poverty - that's without even throwing institutional racism into the mix, something that someone so well versed in issues relating to law enforcement in the capital as yourself must surely be aware of.

Blaming it all on the fact that 'people are scared of being called racist' is no more than a massive cop-out, that only serves to divert attention away from what should be important by raising some erroneous, near-mythical alternative agenda.

Rebrov made an ignorant remark, which was rightly interpreted as having overtly racist connotations. Bottom line. If that makes me a 'wetwang' (although to be honest, as insults go that's about as hurtful as a hard stare from a Chuckle Brother), then 'wetwang I be. Whatever the f*ck that means.

there certainly wasnt many " honkys" on crimewatch last night

Talking of the Chuckle Brothers.

I swear, it's like being tube-fed idiot soup in here sometimes.

[Reece]

Wow this thread really escalated quickly.

[Tee]

Don't be such a wetwang!

Don't stick your head up your arses because you think you may be seen as a racist. Years ago, statistics showed in London that most street muggings were by black kids. Not all black kids are street muggers. Yes, some are actually white!

But, the copper was SACKED for saying it because dicks jumped on his back.

This meant the problem was ignored and swept under the carpet and things for black kids have NOT improved.

WHY?

Because people are so scared of being called racist, they don't want to see whats going on.

To my mind, if you ignore a problem or a fact you don't like because of someones race or skin tone, THEY are the racist. THEY are the ones showing discrimination.

And as I say, thanks to the attitude of people like that, NOTHING has changed.

I found it quite funny that the Home Secretary had the balls to go into a Mosque a couple of years back and ask Muslim parents to be vigilant about what their kids are up to - yet would he have the balls to go to the black community and say the same thing? I mean, lets be honest here, are we more at risk from street crime or terrorism?

[hertsred]

Let's look at it like this. If instead of saying that there is more crime in Tottenham because of the dark skinned people, Rebrov had said there is more crime in Liverpool because of all the Scousers, the outrage on this board would, rightfully, be huge. I can't see the difference personally between the two. Both statements are bigoted crap. Both should be condemned.

[Kenneth]

Let's look at it like this. If instead of saying that there is more crime in Tottenham because of the dark skinned people, Rebrov had said there is more crime in Liverpool because of all the Scousers, the outrage on this board would, rightfully, be huge. I can't see the difference personally between the two. Both statements are bigoted crap. Both should be condemned.

And it's possible that both statements could actually be true. He's not necessarily saying black people = crime, he's effectively saing some non-black people = crime, some black people = crime, a higher number of black people = crime than non black. Big difference. THe latter can be proven to be true or not statistically.

[The_weatherman]

And it's possible that both statements could actually be true. He's not necessarily saying black people = crime, he's effectively saing some non-black people = crime, some black people = crime, a higher number of black people = crime than non black. Big difference. THe latter can be proven to be true or not statistically.

Even though that could be true on the surface we have to look for a third variable, which IMO would be social economic status, around 1920 there was study carried out in Chicago where the researchers found out that some parts of Chicago had higher crime rates, these parts had certain "symptoms" like culture conflict, high rate of turnover in the population, density of population and economic status of the area.

I might be forgetting something though but it was roughly like this. So IMO we, and Rebrov, should focus the attention from race or ethnictiy and towards society and it's build up. Now I have no idea how this area in London is made up but I would say it would be characterized something like this:
* Multicultural society.
* Dense population.
* High rates of turnover in the population - people moving to and from the area.
* Low economic status.

This is a neighbourhood these kids are born into, they don't choose it, the theory intimates that this turmoil is more in the inner city and becomes less apparent in the suburbs.

[Joe King]

BFG and zimbo

I can't be arsed to quote them. Handled well.

[El Jefecito]

Whilst I would love to delve deeper into your skewed ramblings, which read like something that an indignant Dail Mail sub-editor might cough up over his Cornfalkes, I think BFG has summed it up more than adequately. Particularly here:



There are undeniable problems within certain black communities, linked, amongst other things, to the development of unhelpful cultural expectations and aspirations, peer pressure and the need for a greater number of positive role models.

However, underlying these factors, as BFG points out, lies the inescapable fact that black and minority ethnic communities are more likely to be the victims of social and economic inequality, with fewer educational or employment opportunities, and a greater instance of poverty - that's without even throwing institutional racism into the mix, something that someone so well versed in issues relating to law enforcement in the capital as yourself must surely be aware of.

Blaming it all on the fact that 'people are scared of being called racist' is no more than a massive cop-out, that only serves to divert attention away from what should be important by raising some erroneous, near-mythical alternative agenda.

Rebrov made an ignorant remark, which was rightly interpreted as having overtly racist connotations. Bottom line. If that makes me a 'wetwang' (although to be honest, as insults go that's about as hurtful as a hard stare from a Chuckle Brother), then 'wetwang I be. Whatever the f*ck that means.




Talking of the Chuckle Brothers.

I swear, it's like being tube-fed idiot soup in here sometimes.

If A implies B, and, B implies C, does A imply C?