Race issues...

[thealtruist]

If we are then it's only as much as you using it to justify violence.

At no point has anybody said that they agreed with the racist. We don't. Not in the slightest. But we hate violence just as much.

And it angers me even more when you're bragging about it.

This is an issue about racism not about the government. That's a pointless example. But, since you bring it up, what the government did wasn't racism. It was about greed, pure and simple. And lots of people don't support what the government did. And it's got nothing to do with racism.

I'm sure in your "Death Wish" inspired world he's a hero. But, to lots of other people, he's a just a violent man who doesn't have the intelligence to tackle things without using his fists. That's a thug.

You'll never convince me that smacking someone was the right thing to do.

[Sam Slater]

Eh?

[Lizard]

LOL, this thread's surreal.......

[Sam Slater]

[quote]You are purposely using this to steer clear of the subject racism on this forum,[/quote]

Not to blow my own trumpet (oh, go on then....just this once!) but I've done more to ridicule and argue the closet racists on here than the average poster. If you're saying what I think you're saying, you're wrong.

[quote]Moral high ground as nothing to do with violence...[/quote]

Sometimes I really think there are too many people that bash away at their keyboards and don't actually realise what they're saying.

So I can physically attack a little old lady in my lunch hour, tomorrow and my violent kicking of her skull in no way has anything to do with morality? What were you thinking?

[quote]Its fine being keyboard jockeys spouting off about morals but racists shouldn't be given the same grace as other people...next you will be saying the Taliban don't deserve to be stopped by violence.[/quote]

There's a difference between what the Taliban have done and this bigot that got hit by a pool cue, don't you think?

And I could easily follow your logic to another conclusion: if being offended enough justifies violence then you are on the side of people who bomb abortion clinics, or behead a film-maker for criticising Islam?

I think that churches that refuse to marry a gay couple due to their own form of bigotry is just as prejudiced, wrong and dangerous as racist name-calling but I don't think that gives me the right to clobber said vicar/imam over the head with a blunt object.

[Lizard]

Pool hall Richard !wink!

[Flat_Eric]

videokim wrote:

[quote]This thread is about the issues of racism not about the way someone dealt with one.[/quote]


So is that why in your very first post in this thread you said:


[quote]One of our grand children is mixed race, John knocked out a guy with his pool cue one night for making a rude remark that she was a different colour to our other 4 grand children & was she buy one get one free, John did regret his actions later as he could have broken his cue.

His mates asked why he acted the way he did & he explained his great great grandfather was black & a freed slave from Boston, USA, having black family & friends as hardened him in realising how racist scum ruin people lives & he makes it his mission in life to steer these scum right when he can...any guy on here who thinks he is wrong can fetch it up with him at any industry do we attend lol![/quote]


You're the one who moved the goalposts. Jeez ....


- Eric

[David Johnson]

Not surreal, Lizard. Just a misunderstanding.

To clarify Kim, Lizard runs another forum which is invite only. On that forum, posters such as Lizard, Flat Eric, RoddersUK who post on here too, seem to spend a lot of time slagging off myself and Sam Slater for our views which are different from their generally, ferociously right wing politics.

For example, one poster suggested "shooting" me would stop my views being expressed. Another, Lizard, hoped that someone would offer to deck Sam Slater, the cunt.

Flat Eric was also involved in the conversation and made absolutely no criticism of the views expressed.

So by stating as Sam does to Flat Eric "So you don't agree with Liz and Rodders that I need 'decking' or 'shooting'?", Sam is pointing out the complete hypocrisy of Flat Eric and Lizard for slagging you off Kim for your attitude to violence in this situation whereas they appear to have a completely different attitude to violence when it is someone that irritates them.

Nothing at all to do with whether Sam is a racist or not.

Surprisingly, Eric who is usually very fastidious in responding to posts hasn't replied at all to Sam's post here

http://bgafd.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=3&i=263664&t=263605

even when I give Eric a little reminder here

http://bgafd.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=3&i=263674&t=263605

Pathetic or what, eh Kim?

[Flat_Eric]

David Johnson wrote:

> Don't forget to answer this one, Eric.
>
> How embarrassing!


Oh dear David (sigh). Let me explain: If you stray with your donkeys onto your rival's patch down near South Pier, and your rival says "it's that fucking Johnson and his nags again on my turf. I'll bloody kill him" or "he needs a good kicking", he doesn't mean it literally.

It means he's angry with you for queering his pitch. He might even get in your face, shout and swear at you, call you a cunt and tell you to move on further up the beach or else he'll call in the Donkey Patrol. But there's very unlikely to be any actual threat to your life. He's just pissed off. He's not actually going to kill you. It's a figure of speech. Nothing more.

Similarly if Lizard or Rodders types in a thread that Sam Slater deserves a "decking" or "shooting", I'm quite confident that there's no need for Sam to hire an ex-SAS bodyguard to look after him. He'd be quite safe (even if they knew Sam's real name and where and how to find him in the real world). Again - it's just a figure of speech.

Taking a pool cue to someone's head however isn't just a figure of speech. It's an actual act of violence.

Hope that helps explain. For someone who thinks he's intelligent, you really can be a bit thick sometimes David.

- Eric

[videokim]

The guy with friends was provoking an argument and it would have been either John or him that got hurt, kicking an old lady is totally different to whacking a mouthy racist thug who would have attacked us if we didn't get in first. Sometimes violence works depending on the scale of things and nothing you guys have said would change John's mind if in the same situation again. How many coppers get violent to the extent of killing someone because they fear they could be in danger so act first, if John had a truncheon or pepper spray he would have been happy to use it but needs must I'm afraid guys. Depending on where you have been brought up plays a lot on our you handle situations, John was born in West Ham where he ran clubs and had to pay protection to the organised gangs, he as had 2 friends shot lots more injured by people who are not to even fit to breathe our air so yes it hardens you to what some are capable of. For most of you the only fighting you've seen is on a Rocky film because your privileged enough to have been born in a nice area .

[thealtruist]

That's very unfair, Kim.

You don't know any of us. You don't know where we're from. You're just speculating. How do you know we don't come from bad areas and have bad backgrounds? I come from a very rough area but I'm not violent.

Lots of people come from bad areas and backgrounds but have risen above the use of violence knowing how futile it is and self destructive.

But I see how your story's changing. I like that. It's gone from one gobby twat being racist to a whole group of people where a set to was going to happen.