FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[racechick]

Sorry I did not remember that without some reminder, my bad.

Bringing race into this is just another reason why discrimination exist today.

The point is the boy was attacked purely because of his race and no other reason. It caused a huge stir becuse it highlighted racism within the police force(there were mistakes and complacency that prevented the culprits being caught) and only now 18yrs later have two of the perpetrators been brought to justice. It's something of a landmark case becuase it has brought about changes to the justice system

Have to agree with Texasmr2 here. Every time someone of a different racial origin is attacked it is always labelled as a race crime regardless of if it was or wasn't.

But this was a racial crime, there is no 'regardless of if it was or wasn't ' about it.

[andrew]

Sorry I did not remember that without some reminder, my bad.

Bringing race into this is just another reason why discrimination exist today.

The point is the boy was attacked purely because of his race and no other reason. It caused a huge stir becuse it highlighted racism within the police force(there were mistakes and complacency that prevented the culprits being caught) and only now 18yrs later have two of the perpetrators been brought to justice. It's something of a landmark case becuase it has brought about changes to the justice system

Have to agree with Texasmr2 here. Every time someone of a different racial origin is attacked it is always labelled as a race crime regardless of if it was or wasn't.

But this was a racial crime, there is no 'regardless of if it was or wasn't ' about it.

Try reading what I wrote before jumping in. I didn't mention any particular cases in my comment. I just pointed out that it is an assumption that is always latched onto even if it is the wrong assumption.

[racechick]

Try reading the title of the thread.

[andrew]

Try reading the title of the thread.

Try understanding what I wrote - it was in agreement with what Texasmr2 wrote. It is a true fact that whenever a person who is not white is attacked in the UK the police and press jump immediately to the race side of things even when there could be a multitude of alternative reasons. Much like they jump to the assumption that something was an act of terrorism even when it is later proved not to be. See what I mean now? Can't really make it any clearer.

Last I read, the 2 that have been sentenced denied any racial motives and there is no evidence to support the accusation that this was a racially motivated murder.

[racechick]

Try reading the title of the thread.

Try understanding what I wrote - it was in agreement with what Texasmr2 wrote. It is a true fact that whenever a person who is not white is attacked in the UK the police and press jump immediately to the race side of things even when there could be a multitude of alternative reasons. Much like they jump to the assumption that something was an act of terrorism even when it is later proved not to be. See what I mean now? Can't really make it any clearer.

Last I read, the 2 that have been sentenced denied any racial motives and there is no evidence to support the accusation that this was a racially motivated murder.

Thats laughable.They were sentenced to life imprisonment for racially motivated murder. Have you not heard the interviews and seen the police footage? Have you heard the racist language they used?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUecCwfqaJE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4yHm3AfziE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFHvB3m53fg

"No evidence this was a racially motivated murder" What more do you want?

[andrew]

Try reading the title of the thread.

Try understanding what I wrote - it was in agreement with what Texasmr2 wrote. It is a true fact that whenever a person who is not white is attacked in the UK the police and press jump immediately to the race side of things even when there could be a multitude of alternative reasons. Much like they jump to the assumption that something was an act of terrorism even when it is later proved not to be. See what I mean now? Can't really make it any clearer.

Last I read, the 2 that have been sentenced denied any racial motives and there is no evidence to support the accusation that this was a racially motivated murder.

Thats laughable.They were sentenced to life imprisonment for racially motivated murder. Have you not heard the interviews and seen the police footage? Have you heard the racist language they used?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUecCwfqaJE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4yHm3AfziE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFHvB3m53fg

"No evidence this was a racially motivated murder" What more do you want?

Given the hours I work it's hardly surprising that I could have missed something but if you read what I wrote, I said "Last I read" so no need to create drama by trying to make someone look foolish for maybe being a bit behind in the news.

Besides, the footage shows them using racist terms and mucking about with knives. All it proves is that they are a bunch of twats. It doesn't prove that the attack was definately racially motivated. However, whether or not it was racially motived is irrelevant.

The only bit that matters is that a young guy was murdered and the culprits have now been caught. The reasons that the press may cook up are meaningless as no amount of reasoning can explain why someone was murdered for no real reason - it was a pointless waste of a life.

[What's Burning?]

Given the hours I work it's hardly surprising that I could have missed something

Is this an apology?

but if you read what I wrote, I said "Last I read" so no need to create drama by trying to make someone look foolish for maybe being a bit behind in the news.

Is this an excuse?

[andrew]

Given the hours I work it's hardly surprising that I could have missed something

Is this an apology?

No, I don't need to offer any apology so I won't be (obviously). It's a reason for why I may have missed something. A caveat if you will.

but if you read what I wrote, I said "Last I read" so no need to create drama by trying to make someone look foolish for maybe being a bit behind in the news.

Is this an excuse?

No, it's like above. A caveat and me expressing my annoyance of the manufactured drama that exists at times on this site. There would be no argument here if someone would take the time to understand what I wrote rather than going straight for the jugular because they don't agree or don't understand. It is possible to have a discussion without trying to make the other person look stupid.

[racechick]

I didnt try to make you look stupid. If you didnt jump into conversations aggressively when you dont know the facts then you wouldnt feel stupid.

[andrew]

Whetehr intentionally or not, yes you did.

[racechick]

You made yourself look silly. Now why not stop argueing and either discuss Stephen Lawrence or contribute to a different thread.

[andrew]

Well I was discussing an aspect of the case and the way that the whole race thing is always latched on too whether or not it is the case......

[racechick]

But you arent now, that was many posts back. Now you're just derailing the thread. So please continue about Stpehen lawrence or desist.

[andrew]

Well before I'm incorrectly accused of anything else again....

Stephen Lawrence's father is reported as being satisfied with the outcome of the trial - Stephen Lawrence's father 'totally satisfied'

[racechick]

It must be a huge weight lifted for the family, and its done a lot of good in Britain. Icing on the cake will be if they can nail the rest of them.
It has split up the parents marriage and Stephen's friend continues with psycological problems.