Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Tuesday night live on sky Milwall v QPR be interesting to see what happens
Tuesday night live on sky Milwall v QPR be interesting to see what happens
They are Millwall, they don't care, so probably the same thing again.Tuesday night live on sky Milwall v QPR be interesting to see what happens
I've been quite clear in not calling you a racist, so maybe you don't need to be as upset as you say you are.
Plenty of other people have already tried to point you in the right direction, but if you're still looking for more articles which explain why raising a fist isn't always an indefensible call for violent revolution, then:
Here's a brief overview of the history of raising fists: The history of the raised fist, a global symbol of fighting oppression
Here's one athlete's interview on why he raises a fist before games (he even mentions black power as part of it!): Robert Quinn explains the reason for his raised fist
More where that came from too.
They are Millwall, they don't care, so probably the same thing again.
Thing is, now the Millwall players are going to HAVE to take the knee again aren't they, otherwise it would be seen as just bowing down to a racist mob.
The difference for me is one player has gone on one knee and raised an arm. The other has stood up and raised an arm.Best write to the club & ask them to have a word with our Player of the Year then.
View attachment 17782
The difference for me is one player has gone on one knee and raised an arm. The other has stood up and raised an arm.
The idea was that all players are supposed to go on one knee. Solidarity from all involved. Saying we are all the same. If a white player stood alone he would get slaughtered. A black player stands alone and he gets defended and even praised by some.
I don't have a problem with it myself. But those who do have a problem with it are given plenty of ammunition. At least it brings it back into the spotlight as it has now become something that just happens and not something thought provoking.
Jeez, that’s a stereotype and a half. So all black people should know everything about black history and white people not. Fact is he referenced a specific event as his motive but didn’t emulate them in every detail. Maybe he was referencing them as black sportsmen taking a stand in comparison to himself. Maybe he deliberately didn’t wear the black glove because he considered that too inflammatory. Given you’ve gone straight to the raised fist meaning violence of actually a small percentage of the black power movement if that was Lewis Hamilton’s reasoning for not wearing a black glove then it’s fair to say he had a point.Are you trying to tell a black person he doesn’t know what he’s talking about on black power?
What is his reasoning? Has he explained?The difference for me is one player has gone on one knee and raised an arm. The other has stood up and raised an arm.
The idea was that all players are supposed to go on one knee. Solidarity from all involved. Saying we are all the same. If a white player stood alone he would get slaughtered. A black player stands alone and he gets defended and even praised by some.
I don't have a problem with it myself. But those who do have a problem with it are given plenty of ammunition. At least it brings it back into the spotlight as it has now become something that just happens and not something thought provoking.
The knee makes more sense to me. Everyone knows the association.I really don't like the raised fist. More of a supremacy gesture than equality IMO.
Don't you mean she?Or does this not count because he's kneeling?
Even though he didn't do it at the agreed time?
View attachment 17791
If you look at the history of it it’s actually the complete opposite. It’s a counter to the Roman or if you prefer Nazi salute, which absolutely means supremacy.I really don't like the raised fist. More of a supremacy gesture than equality IMO.
Yes they are, I was wondering when the racist apologiser in chief would show his face.
Spon End twat
Di Canio?
The idea is all players should take the knee. It shows we are all equal. But as I said someone not doing so gets defended. It also gives ammunition.What is his reasoning? Has he explained?
Are you trying to tell a black person he doesn’t know what he’s talking about on black power?
And hasn’t had a contract sinceBoth pieces are a bit sketchy on what they mean by ‘protect our own’. Stokely Carmichael was quite clear on what it meant to him. I’m also not saying that modern sportsmen and women are pushing for a call to arms, but in the context of civil rights this gesture and slogan were distinct from peaceful protest.
I fully understand taking the knee as I know exactly why Kaepernick did it. I still don’t really get this on the salute though.
I really don't like the raised fist. More of a supremacy gesture than equality IMO.
And hasn’t had a contract since
Jeez, that’s a stereotype and a half. So all black people should know everything about black history and white people not. Fact is he referenced a specific event as his motive but didn’t emulate them in every detail. Maybe he was referencing them as black sportsmen taking a stand in comparison to himself. Maybe he deliberately didn’t wear the black glove because he considered that too inflammatory. Given you’ve gone straight to the raised fist meaning violence of actually a small percentage of the black power movement if that was Lewis Hamilton’s reasoning for not wearing a black glove then it’s fair to say he had a point.
If you look at the history of it it’s actually the complete opposite. It’s a counter to the Roman or if you prefer Nazi salute, which absolutely means supremacy.
Both pieces are a bit sketchy on what they mean by ‘protect our own’. Stokely Carmichael was quite clear on what it meant to him. I’m also not saying that modern sportsmen and women are pushing for a call to arms, but in the context of civil rights this gesture and slogan were distinct from peaceful protest.
I fully understand taking the knee as I know exactly why Kaepernick did it. I still don’t really get this on the salute though.
If you look at the history of it it’s actually the complete opposite. It’s a counter to the Roman or if you prefer Nazi salute, which absolutely means supremacy.
The IWW were using it as a symbol back in 1917, it was a republican symbol in the Spanish Civil War, It is used by feminists, it's the symbol of the socialist international and it's the symbol of the party that currently governs Spain. It's also the symbol of Northern soul.
Just because you associate it with the BPP doesn't mean it is anything but the international symbol of Solidarity.
In the context of civil rights in the USA there is not much other association.
Not according to Tommie Smith the man who won gold in the 200m at the 1968 games and along with John Carlos protested on the podium.
"To this very day, the gesture made on the victory stand is described as Black Power salute; it was not." "We were students, and we were dedicated to the Olympic Project for Human Rights."
As per his autobiography.
So who is right? The man who have the most famous version of this salute or BSB?
Not according to Tommie Smith the man who won gold in the 200m at the 1968 games and along with John Carlos protested on the podium.
"To this very day, the gesture made on the victory stand is described as Black Power salute; it was not." "We were students, and we were dedicated to the Olympic Project for Human Rights."
As per his autobiography.
So who is right? The man who have the most famous version of this salute or BSB?
No. I think it makes it a Black Panther Party saluteI guess Tony is wrong as he thinks the black glove makes it a Black Power salute. Who is right about what Black Power can mean as a slogan, DOD or MLK?
I guess Tony is wrong as he thinks the black glove makes it a Black Power salute. Who is right about what Black Power can mean as a slogan, DOD or MLK?
You see versions of it all around Asia. The use predates the Nazis and is a symbol of good luck in many Asian religions and culture.That's how he intended it. It doesn't mean it hasn't been hijacked and the message altered in the meantime. As I said before the Swastika is a symbol of peace. Given Coventry is a city of peace and reconciliation should we start putting swastika's up around the place? Or do you think Hitler and neo-Nazi's using it for other means might have a bit of an effect on how people view it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?