Tom Adeyemi

[redinoz]

I will say that Australians are more racist towards Aborigines, than any other person of colour. There are still very open wounds between white and black Australia.

 

Not starting an argument here DG, just affirming that we do infact have a clue about racism.

[dirk grout]

I will say that Australians are more racist towards Aborigines, than any other person of colour. There are still very open wounds between white and black Australia.

 

Not starting an argument here DG, just affirming that we do infact have a clue about racism.

 

You do mate, he doesn't.

[A_S]

I've yet to meet an Aussie with even the first clue about racism. You claim that 'his alleged act is the most serious form of racism, ie wanting to seriously injure or kill a man because of his race', yet from the small amount of 'research' i've done I have discovered that the man attacked is in fact of the same 'race' as Jurrah. I believe he is a member of his family. You seem to think that this is racist because a black person is involved. I think that you are either thick, racist or both. And, for the record, they are the original owners of your country so there is no need for the inverted commas implying that this may be in some way untrue.

 

Ok, upon reading that as how you've taken it, I can understand how you've taken your view to some degree, but I can absolutely assure you I am not thick or racist.

 

The 'original owners of this country' remark line is not meant to imply I didn't believe it to be true, as of course aborigines were here before the white European settlers. However, it is exactly the kind of thing you read whenever there is an attempt at downplaying or excusing something such as the attack I mentioned. As if daring to accuse an aborigine of something similar to this attack, as they are the rightful owners of this land and who are white men, who only settled here a relatively short time ago, to come here and tell them what laws they should live by, etc. So an aboriginal guy born in this country, as I was, is my age and has lived his life under the same basic laws I have, can play that card regardless of what he does and that is a valid reason?

 

I should point out, though, that from the articles I had read (though these were early reports, which perhaps accounts for their inaccuracies), it was tribe-related, so I apologise for that if it was incorrectly reported (and repeated here by me), but I absolutely stand by the fact that the media often try and act like a black man isn't capable of racism, as shown by trying to downplay a man trying to injure another man in such a serious way, and why? The fact is he armed himself with the machete, then tried to injure/kill a man, regardless of whether it was family related, race/tribe-related or otherwise.

 

Aborigines are every bit as capable of it and I have personal experience, to the point where I was knocked unconscious for being the only white person at a party I was invited to by the host, an aboriginal lad who is still a very good friend of mine. I know it because my friend later told me that was the only reason I was assaulted, by a guy I have still never met.

 

Getting back to the original point (and redinoz highlighted this), the difference between the reaction of a word with ambiguous meaning uttered once and the shitstorm that followed, in comparison to a full-blown serious weapon assault that has a man still in hospital with serious injuries. And the alleged attacker is the one a lot closer to being defended by the media than the one who dared use his own language in a foreign country.

[A_S]

You do mate, he doesn't.

 

Based on inverted commas and what?

[A_S]

Ummm, we get racism. I see it often, from both sides.

However it is a very different history of abuse that black/white in the UK or US. Just as horrible, but entirely different. More akin to the Native American plight than the enforced slavery of Africans.

 

That said, you are right in the above statement about the tribal feud. It's between two blackfellas*, and nothing racist about it.

 

I think Aussie Scouser was perhaps referring to the notion that he might not get as harsh a public/media reaction as Suarez did for saying a word, as it's just "a tribal feud" rather than somebody attacking someone with a machete.**

 

*as racist a word as negrito.. not very. Well, where I'm from anyway. I'm a whitefella, he's a blackfella.

 

**Perhaps, I don't actually know if that's what he's trying to say.

 

You do mate, he doesn't

[A_S]

I will say that Australians are more racist towards Aborigines, than any other person of colour. There are still very open wounds between white and black Australia.

 

Not starting an argument here DG, just affirming that we do infact have a clue about racism.

 

Yep, I would go along with most of that, in that there are still 'open wounds', but whether it is more racist than other countries (is that what you meant?), I couldn't say. I will suggest though, that it is a two-way street and this idea that they are only ever the victim is just wrong.

 

Is it a case of political correctness trying so hard to balance out wrongs of whites towards blacks in the past, that it is almost racist in itself to see a black man as anything but a victim? Take Evra's claim about 'you're only booking me because I'm black'. Insinuating the referee was a racist because he had the gall to book him. Looking at the skin colour of the people involved rather than the act itself.

 

All I did earlier was attempt to highlight the difference in the ways the media reported two cases. Admittedly, I based my opinion on an inaccurate report and for that I apologised. However, shit DOES happen like that attack and it occurs because of tribal feuding (clan war was the original phrase regarding this case that I saw), which is as racist as a white man attacking a black man, as they are both based on hate stemming from the background of a person, be it skin colour, religion, race, tribe, whatever. But they are not treated the same way by the media.

 

To be accused of being racist because of that was annoying, as it was definitely not my intention, but my original post was born out of frustration at the shit way political correctness has muddied the waters regarding racism.

 

Apologies for the mulitple threads, but when I tried to add a few points into the one edited post I was told I was too late, hence the few posts.

[A_S]

one who knows he won't get charged in order to avoid him being left out to dry by a bunch of corrupt cunts?

 

You do wonder who that 'member of the public' was that reported the Terry case to the police and if they were related in any way to Chelsea.

[s(k)aturation]

I've yet to meet an Aussie with even the first clue about racism. You claim that 'his alleged act is the most serious form of racism, ie wanting to seriously injure or kill a man because of his race', yet from the small amount of 'research' i've done I have discovered that the man attacked is in fact of the same 'race' as Jurrah. I believe he is a member of his family. You seem to think that this is racist because a black person is involved. I think that you are either thick, racist or both. And, for the record, they are the original owners of your country so there is no need for the inverted commas implying that this may be in some way untrue.

 

So how many would that be, Dirk, from a sample of 20-plus million?

[Coro]

Fucking little weasel.

There's a certian tone in his Twitter posts on this, don't you agree?

 

Playing right into his hands posting up a link to his twitter profile.

 

Most of these journo's are no better than your average forum troll, they have to be otherwise, these days, no one would take a blind bit of notice.

 

Having him on that TAW podcast was a joke, as well.