Romelu Lukaku

Originally Posted by MonkeyOnMyBack

You seem surprisingly naive on how history is written.

If only I had your unique insight to the real truth, sensai.

Originally Posted by irk

If only I had your unique insight to the real truth, sensai.

Healthy skepticism is all.

Originally Posted by MonkeyOnMyBack

Healthy skepticism is all.

Except when it comes to examine your own arguments.

Why do you think slavery was abolished then?

Originally Posted by Sapien

Microagression after microagression from the lad irk. They can't help theirself.

I'm triggered. Can I get some counselling over here please? No white males, this is supposed to be a safe space.

Originally Posted by irk

Except when it comes to examine your own arguments.

Why do you think slavery was abolished then?



I'm triggered. Can I get some counselling over here please? No white males, this is supposed to be a safe space.

I generally think of an attempt to discredit the messenger as a sign of difficulty in discrediting the message itself.

Originally Posted by Baron

I don't disagree with any of that, I see the reaction as basically the exact same thing as everything else that happens when it's United - News. We're everyone else's meal-ticket aren't we.

Also shit at making up songs, but so it goes.

Peak media frenzy. Racism + united = front page, back page, opinion pieces from Oxbridge educated £#%&!ers.

Originally Posted by utd99

Isn't this the definition of every joke ever told about anyone? Whether the joke is funny or not is another subject entirely -- this one isn't --, however if I heard Dave Chappelle tell a joke based on his perception of white people, and it was funny, I'd laugh my arse off. I wouldn't be sitting there wondering if it were discernably true or not.

We need to draw a line between asking people to conduct themselves with decency (which is reasonable) and acting like automotons (which is not).

Time & place, context is everything. Whilst there's always a grey area as to what is funny or not, what is offensive or isn't is open for discussion, like this thread - made up of some decent arguments - it's not a leap to see why the song would be considered offensive.

Originally Posted by utd99

I generally think of an attempt to discredit the messenger as a sign of difficulty in discrediting the message itself.

Well, he's certainly not engaged with any of the arguments. Relying instead on reformulating the original "Whitey is bad mmkay".

Big Rommers loves it apparently

Still a shite song tho'.

Originally Posted by dragflick

Big Rommers loves it apparently

Still a shite song tho'.

Hope he doesn't have to release a statement, leave the baying mobs mouth open....

"But, but, but.....the slave trade !!"

Originally Posted by dragflick

Big Rommers loves it apparently

Still a shite song tho'.

"It's twue, it's twue"

https://youtu.be/s9JqbCH4aVw

Ban this sick filth now!

Scan read through this, has it been determined if he has a whopper or not?

Originally Posted by irk

Well, he's certainly not engaged with any of the arguments. Relying instead on reformulating the original "Whitey is bad mmkay".

People rarely question their beliefs mate. It's why debate --actual, real debate -- is dead and division reigns supreme. Racists exist, of course they do, as do sexists and homophobes, however regular people who try to conduct themselves with basic human decency are getting thoroughly tired of having to answer for the conduct of their ancestors as justification for being attacked in the here and now.

Originally Posted by dragflick

Big Rommers loves it apparently

Still a shite song tho'.

"Well done..."

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

"Well done..."

I think silv has done that already. Admittedly and not suprisingly, not as well, but still...

Originally Posted by dragflick

I think silv has done that already. Admittedly and not suprisingly, not as well, but still...

Fred loves a Brent reference. Foookin' loovs it.

Originally Posted by silv

Originally Posted by dragflick

I think silv has done that already. Admittedly and not suprisingly, not as well, but still...

Originally Posted by irk

Except when it comes to examine your own arguments.



Why do you think slavery was abolished then?
.

I dont believe it would have been allowed to happen unless it was economically advantageous - declining trade in w. Indies with American independence. Or without a military strategic angle - using the anti slaving fleet to expand and consolidate the other colonies.

Originally Posted by utd99

People rarely question their beliefs mate. It's why debate --actual, real debate -- is dead and division reigns supreme. Racists exist, of course they do, as do sexists and homophobes, however regular people who try to conduct themselves with basic human decency are getting thoroughly tired of having to answer for the conduct of their ancestors as justification for being attacked in the here and now.

People very rarely change their minds on Facebook or internet message boards. Much less than when they talk in real life