If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Tor MP sacked for revealing that bears go in the woods...
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Story.
It's interesting how the debate on race has veered so far to the politically-correct left that someone is sacked from their job for expressing their personal experiences.
*sigh*
As usual its fine to abuse people, so long as you only abuse them in politically-correct ways.
It's interesting how the debate on race has veered so far to the politically-correct left that someone is sacked from their job for expressing their personal experiences.
*sigh*
As usual its fine to abuse people, so long as you only abuse them in politically-correct ways.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
We did have one case where a couple of junior NCO's seemed to take a particular dislike to one of the black blokes - which resulted in some very heavily slapped wrists and postings all round.
That said as a regiment we were better integrated than where we recruited from - generally the Prods and Catholics didn't shoot each other and places bombs under each others cars...
That, when you think about it, is rather hard to believe. Did he really meet "a lot" of them? Did he meet them well enough to really establish they were "idle and useless"? And did he spend enough time with them to know they were playing the race card?
Or is he just a little prejudiced twat?
Has anyone actually read the entire quote?
The problem is with this comment not the rest, the rest is just obvious (is calling someone a ginger bastard really that much better than black bastard?).
He said in the interview "a lot" but when pressed on The World at One on Radio 4 he said "well I can think of at least two incidences" - two is not 'a lot'.
I have read the entire quote, and whilst misguided, I have a feeling that it is probably pretty accurate. He's personally come across two, I would have thought his colleagues would have done too, but racism is the new taboo and he had to go.
This country is an absolute joke.
Which is not racist at all- just a bit of taunting with the intention of spice up and motivate people, even if through anger or scorn.
No racist at all... unless the person saying it is a Spanish football manager- in which case of course we have in our hands a disgraceful racist who should be kicked out of his job in disgrace.
It is really quite hilarious the double standards on this forum sometimes...
What on earth are you blathering on about?
Aragones didn't just call Henry a black bastard, he told Reyes that he should be 100 times better than Henry because Reyes was white and Henry is black. That's where the racism was.
At least get the facts right.
Nor that I'm defending Aragones mind you- I'm not. But there is no difference between Aragones saying that to Reyes and Army officers saying that to soldiers- hell, some would argue at least Aragones is not directly abusing the black man and therefore is not nearly as bad as the Army officers.
There is no difference between the two cases. Other than patriotic leanings, obviously...
Reyes said it was said like that. Last time I checked Reyes was fluent in Spanish, and wouldn't have trouble with the translation...
A better comparison would be with Ron Atkinson, and my belief is that he was stitched up by the PC nobbers too.
Yes your hypocrisy is quite outstanding. It honestly doesn't get much for you to change from a left wing eurofederalist to a rightwing Spanish nationalist does it?
Find a single quote I have ever made when I have defended Aragones or suggested he wasn't a racist.
What I have said is that there is no difference between him and Army officers calling others ni ggers, or indeed MPs saying "a lot" of ethnic minorities are lazy bastards playing the race card.
It's not me who is the hypocrite here; it's those who are quite selective in their branding of somebody as a racist- decided, it would appear, by nothing more than the nationality of the perpetrator.
You were the one who brought him up not me... But despite your attempt at qualification your claim that it wasn't said or meant like that is a blatant attempt to defend Aragones
After all the soldiers who served with Mercer, black as well as white, seem to be supportive of him and agree with what he was saying. He seems to be being branded a racist not because of his nationality but because he's a Tory MP - it doesn't take too much brains to spot the hypocrisy and it isn't from me or Kermit...
As an aside I think his expereince is different from mine (perhaps because we had a lot more Fijian and Carribean blokes) and it was the girlie card which was played more often. Still I suppose your going to brand me as sexist now and demand I resign....
And I bring it up because it easily springs to mind. Specially when many of the very people who were spitting blood about Aragones' comments are springing to the defence of a British person doing just the same. I really find it quite hilarious.
Or perhaps because generalisations and stereotyping of entire races is considered by most of us as racism?
I put it to you that "a lot" of ethnic minority people are not lazy and do not play the race card, like this Tory MP claims. It sounds like total bullshit to me- and he himself only seems to remember one case to mention.
But of course, I guess one lazy man a whole race lazy makes... :rolleyes:
Except they're not
I've read the report, nowhere does it say that the MP believes black people to be inferior. Aragones told a footballer that he should be better than another footballer simply because he is white. Stop making yourself look like a tool.
Thats not what he claimed though Aladdin. He simply said that he had met "al lot" of ethnic monorities in the army who were "idle and useless", but used their ethnicity as a "cover" for their idleness and uselessness, i.e. "played the race card."
Thats not the same thing as saying all of them are lazy. He probably encountered many more lazy white soldiers but it would be irrelevant to mention them because in his opinion they were disciplined effectively as they couldn't "play the race card."
And yes perhaps Mercer could have phrased it better (though he remembers two cases rather than one) but to suggest the man is a racist given his record of a) dealing promptly with racist bullying which he came across b) promoting his black soldiers without fear or favour and c) being supported by soldiers who served with him; is rather dim.
And it is bloody hypocritical. What's the difference between calling somebody a nigg er in the face or describe them as a black shit in third person? None whatsoever (other perhaps than the argument of whether saying it behind someone's back is a more cowardly act). But either they're both racist incidents or ain't. Either both offenders are racist, or they are not.
So you're suggesting instead that they're racist against the Spanish? Hey, its as easy to twist your words as you seem to be finding it to twist what Mercer said.
Huh?
What does Aragones being spanish make any difference to suggesting that his comments were racist? Do you think we have something against the spanish?
The difference here is that Aragones said that Reyes should be better than "that black bastard" (or words to that effect) whereas Mercer put the comment in context of general abuse/motivation which was aimed at anything - size, hair colour, race. He didn't say it was right or oky, just that it was part and parcel of being in the Army.
Now, I am not going to condone racism, but issue like this do bring into question how tough and intimidating the soldiers training needs to be...
I see two possible incidents of racism in this case: the Tory MP making generalisations (completely unfair and prejudiced IMO and I hope in the opinion of most people) about people from certain ethnic backgrounds being idle and willing to play the race card) and army officers calling people ni ggers.
Whereas the former is not a very relevant direct comparison to the Aragones case, I certainly see it as a racist comment, or at very best extremely prejudiced, bigoted, false and idiotic.
With regards to the latter, it makes a rather interesting comparison with the Aragones case. I shall state first, because some people here are quick to jump to conclusions, that I am not defending his actions or suggesting he wasn't being racist. But his actions are no different from an army officer calling people ni gger.
Aragones didn't say to Reyes he should be better than Henry because the latter is black. Aragones was simply saying Reyes was or should be a better player than Henry (which at the time was considered just about the best in the world and in everyone's mouth) but he disgustingly referred to him as 'that black shit'. He wasn't talking about blacks in general or speaking about racial supremacy. He was racially insulting one particular individual.
Just like the army officer who calls people ni gger is.
And just like all those lovely ladies at the Big Brother house were to Shilpa Shetty- another incident in which a few people rushed to say did not constitute racism but just bullying.
I have - it was bollocks.
if you're not defending Aragones you're making a poor fist of criticisng him. In fact by trying to compare to totally different cases and saying they're comparable you are implicitly defending Aragones. I'm quite prepared to accept that you're doing so by accident - but you are defending him all the same.
The BB house, Aragones and Mercer are not the same thing at all...
Also where does it say anything about officers calling people '******' - from my experience officers don't call soldiers by their nicknames. Mercer never said he called soldiers that for starters, he said that soldiers were called it - same as I was called a Mick, Liverpudlians were thieving scouse gits, Welsh were sheepshaggers etc, etc.
And what he then said was that it doesn't mean a thing and he's right. Its not evidence of ingrained racism with the armed forces (with the exception of the Guards who were basically tall civilians in uniform).
Reyes, who is Spanish, was the one who told the world what Aragones said. There was no "lost in translation" problem unless you are trying to say that Reyes cannot speak Spanish or is a liar.
Could you explain the difference between calling someone a black shit and calling someone a ni gger? They look pretty much the same thing to me when discussing racist comments
"They prospered inside my regiment, but if you'd said to them 'Have you ever been called a ******,' they would have said 'Yes.'
[...]
"If someone is slow on the assault course, you'd get people shouting: 'Come on you fat bastard, come on you ginger bastard, come on you black bastard.'"
Whereas it is true that it doesn't necessarily say that it was officers who shouted such things, I think it's fair to assume that at least some of that was said by officers. But that is irrelevant. The point is that it was said to black people. 'Ni gger'. 'Black bastard'.
I'll ask again: how is that different from calling someone a 'black shit'?
If you don't think the Aragones incident meant a thing either that's fine. My original comment was about those who scream "racist!" at Aragones and even go on to suggest Spain has massive racism problems while claiming similar incidents in Britain are not racist at all.
The double standards are laughable as are pathetic.