Why isnt this murder flagged as racist ?

Discussion in 'The ARRSE Hole' started by I_say_again, Nov 22, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. "Asian gang members who boasted they had killed a white man have been found guilty of murder."

    Although this is a racist murder the word racist isn't mentioned,but when these racist scum later...
    ...."moved on to Ilford where they shouted racial abuse at a black resident who remonstrated after they damaged vehicles and set off car alarms."

    So it's not racist to murder a white man but is racist to shout at a black man ?

    The words double & standards spring to mind.

  2. I agree with you entirely. I also think you are fishing to get some squaddies to say racist things so you can bubble them to the press. it aint going to happen.

    I'm not being funny but after a token joke post your only other contribution has been regarding the potential use of an offensive weapon? Quite unusual so you will forgive me I hope If I treat you with a certain amount of suspiscion. I mean no offence but I think it would be a good idea if we are a little guarded about our replies to this post.
  3. ermm... I don't understand what you are getting at....

    The exact wording on the BBC index page http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/default.stm is...

    Doesn't that make it quite obvious that there was a racial element to this murder????

  4. Murder is murder no matter what colour probably isnt what you want to hear but there it is
  5. Then you'd be wrong. If I was fishing for racist comments I'd be posting on the knobhead BNP type websites.

    I think this smacks of double standards and is wrong and shows how biased things have become.
  6. My point is the word racist/racial isn't mentioned in regard to the murder of the white but is when they shouted at the black man.
  7. I'm afraid I'm still not convinced. Sorry.
  8. Good Call Lairdx.
  9. Stop whining...

    I'd imagine the reason they didn't happen to use the phrase 'racist' is because they wanted to make sure the title included the direct quote from one of the defendants 'white man'. After the attack they shouted "We have killed the white man. That will teach an Englishman to interfere in Paki business."

    Title's of stories have to be reasonably short.... and "GANG GUILTY OF RACIST 'WHITE MAN' DEATH" makes no sense becasue you are repeating the fact that it a racially motivated attack.

    Seems reasonable enought don't you think? Yes of course it is... now go away and stop whining...

  10. Not a problem.
  11. But the axe muder of the black lad was flagged as "racist murder"....you don't see the double standards ?
  12. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes

    Probably also because if you read the rest of the report, the gang involved went on to assault an Asian chap and a black chap afterwards.

    Less 'racist' more 'drunken' by the sound of things. Whomever they'd happened across first would have been attacked if the BBC story is correct.
  13. I_say_again - DID YOU READ MY FACKIN POST YOU IDIOT????.... I spent long enough typing it in so you could at least read it...

    I reckon the BBC wanted to include the direct quote from one of the defendants... Including the direct quote makes it obvious to everyone there was a racial element to this... so THERE WAS NO DOUBLE STANDARDS HERE....

    Now go away and stop ruining ARRSE current affairs....

  14. OOOH get you, resorting to name calling, there's adult debate for you.

    You can't see double standards ? never mind.
  15. I agree with all you.

    I do think society, the press in particular, see racism as "one way". Stephen Lawrence, the black lad killed with the ice pick, the asian lad murdered at Feltham - the press always say "murdered black/asian teenager ...."

    The case is question is one of the few where they do point out the white ethnicity of the victim as being relevant.
    I also think it would have sounded incorrect adding the word racist to the title.

    It happens all too often, even the legal system sees racism as one way - I arrested someone for Racially aggrevated s.4a public order for calling me "English white honky scum" and the CPS boshed it to Drunk & Dis!!! where after 9/11 I arrested a guy for calling my collegue a "muslim terrorist" (he was a Sikh skipper) and it got ramped up to S.4, passed to the CSU to investigate and he was sent home on compassionate leave - against his will!!

    Its not the colour of the skin of the victim that matters, its the intetion of the guilty party. If it was a racist attack, report is as such and of not, leave colour out of it!