Clarkson to be sued - I hope

[red devil]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The real problem of racism ?

> Since when did the English refer to the Irish as

> white middle class Europeans

>

> No blacks

> No dogs

> No Irish

>

> In that order

To be fair Mick that was a long time ago, things have moved on a lot since then, we even like Louis Walsh.

And I wouldn't give the order too much significance, probably written alphabetically rather than prejudicially.

And I don't agree including nationality as a form of racism as lots of races can make up a nation, but having said that, there is a difference between calling someone a ''lazy cunt'' and a ''lazy Irish cunt'' whilst thumping them...context, innit.

[Mick Mac]

Ok I'll refer you modern day dinosaurs to the United Nations definition:

the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin that has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.[22]

[maxxi]

The UN.

Well that's alright then.

Phew.

[red devil]

What does that 'definition' actually mean in legal terms Mick? Is it just some sort of edict/directive, or is it legally binding in some way?...

[????]

Mick. I am not sure you are clear on the difference between being charged with a criminal offence and being sued in a private action.

[Seabag]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ok I'll refer you modern day dinosaurs to the

> United Nations definition:

>

> the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any

> distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference

> based on race, colour, descent, or national or

> ethnic origin that has the purpose or effect of

> nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment

> or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights

> and fundamental freedoms in the political,

> economic, social, cultural or any other field of

> public life.[22]

'descent' wow! so if for arguments sake you're descended from a family of tall hairy people, under the UN definition it would be discriminatory to be called a "lazy lanky hairy cunt" when being repremanded

Though being punched in the gob, (if they could reach)of course would be assault

[uncleglen]

The public sector employers, and the BBC most probably, commit racial discrimination all the time since they restrict the employment of white males - it was a standing joke in school that the preferential order of employing someone was, Favourite- black woman, 2nd, black man, white woman on equal footing, and if you were a white man and saw any of the aforementioned waiting to be interviewed you may as well go home.

[Otta]

I don't agree that public sector restrict the employment of white men.

But I will say that white men are the only people that don't fit in to public sector minority groups.

[Mick Mac]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick. I am not sure you are clear on the

> difference between being charged with a criminal

> offence and being sued in a private action

True. I shouldnt have in haste used the word crime.

So putting that aside I'm trying to focus the discussion on the current definition of racism, which is very different from the very narrow understanding of it that some people seem to have and is now outdated.

[Mick Mac]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What does that 'definition' actually mean in legal

> terms Mick? Is it just some sort of

> edict/directive, or is it legally binding in some

> way?...

I refer my learned friend to the answer above

I am interested in this case as it will be potentially high profile.

If he's after the money, then it will settle out of court. If he is interested in defending the principle then it will go to court and will be the subject of interesting legal debate.

The basis of the war against racism is that people are treated equally irrespective of "background".

This is putting it in focus.

[Alan Medic]

It's all just words in my view. If he wasn't Irish, JC may have used fat, bald, stupid or anything else you can think of. Even, Northerner, if he was from the North. I expect the guy wants to make some money and he probably will.

[????]

Here's my guess on this:

Bloke's a bit crap - doesn't do his job very well

Pissed Clarkson lumps him...that's assault and he deserves to be prosecuted

BBC doesn't want any scandal - offer some sweetners, let's for get about this.. all round trying to sweep it under carpet

News leaks out bloke gets death threats etc and things do I want this hassle

Bloke maybe has work drying up with BBC (for being a bit crap possibly - all conjecture) and thinks hang on a minute I've been hard done by here (and to a degree he's right) so takes out this action

The 'racism' is really an irrelevance

[Mick Mac]

It's not irrelevant if it's the basis of the claim is it.

In fact it becomes everything - and whether he's crap becomes irrelevant by virtue of Clarksons choice of words.

[????]

Sorry, to be clear. The racism is what he's got left to get some financial restitution is my cynical view.

[Mick Mac]

Your point was already clear, but conjecture.

The racism angle becomes relevant as it's the basis of the claim. This is indisputable and to state that it's irrelevant is clearly wrong.

His personal reasons for doing it will also be relevant if he can show loss of earnings. This loss of earnings and the impact of the incident on his life will have become more apparent over time and easier to ascertain.

Hence he's perfectly entitled to wait and make the claim now that he knows the full impact on his life.

The racism is not all he has left. He didn't make a previous claim and thetfore has claimed for the asssault and the racism now.

The interesting bit is obviously whether there was or wasn't any racism.

[Loz]

He's been off on full pay until he turned down a chance to return to the new Chris Evans version of Top Gear, so any claim of lost earnings would be surprising.

Still, Clarkson's new show is due soon and the publicity will be invaluable.

[Mick Mac]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> He's been off on full pay until he turned down a

> chance to return to the new Chris Evans version of

> Top Gear, so any claim of lost earnings would be

> surprising.

ah - didn't know that.

[Mick Mac]

Written March 2015

The Top Gear presenter's reported tirade against producer Oisin Tymon is a reminder that anti-Irish prejudice still runs deep

It has been a good week for the Irish in Britain. Or at least this Irishman in Britain. On Wednesday, in a pub in North London, I saw one of our (and the world?s) greatest living poets, Eavan Boland, give a brilliant interview to journalist JP O?Malley covering swathes of Irish identity, gender, art, and politics.

On Friday, I managed to come out of the Cheltenham Gold Cup 50p up , using my time-tested strategy of ?bet on whatever Ruby Walsh is riding?. It?s Saturday morning now, so I?m not going to jinx our rugby and cricket teams by suggesting this enjoyable run will continue. Meanwhile, Saint Patrick?s Day celebrations will take place across Irish diaspora communities in Britain right up until the day itself on Tuesday. The sun is shining in my London Irish neighbourhood, where I can buy every Irish food I can imagine, read every Irish regional paper, and listen to live traditional music in welcoming pubs most nights of the week. I like being Irish in London.

But as always, the silver lining carries its cloud. According to the Daily Mirror this morning, the Jeremy Clarkson controversy at the BBC has escalated considerably. The paper reports that the BBC investigation into Clarkson?s ?fracas? with Top Gear producer Oisin Tymon will be told that: ?[Clarkson] called Oisin a ?lazy, Irish c***? before splitting his lip with a punch that left the 36-year-old with blood running down his face and needing treatment in A&E.?

If this account is true (Clarkson is said to deny it, it should be noted), then this is racially aggravated assault, no different than if Clarkson had abused a black, Asian or Jewish colleague.

This does not seem to deter the hundreds of thousands of Clarkson fans who will, presumably, condone racism as classic banter, just as they have condoned violence.

The queer thing about anti-Irish racism (and its partner, anti-Catholicism), is that a hell of a lot of British people are in denial about its existence (trust me, Irish people are not). It was, certainly, worse during the ?Troubles?, but there is a mistaken belief that the Troubles was the sole reason for anti-Irish feeling.

In truth, of course, it is a hell of a lot more complicated than that. Ireland was one of the first colonies: justification for all colonisation, then as now, is partly found in the dehumanisation of the conquered. The Irish, with their distinct laws, customs and language, were not really fit to rule themselves (how often is that sentiment echoed today?); we were not diligent, we were not to be trusted: they were, as Mr Clarkson would have it, ?lazy Irish cunts?.

Every so often, a well-meaning British liberal friend will either a) declare matily that ?we?re all the same? and what the hell was all that fighting about, eh? or b) inquire archly about whether, considering the decades of quasi-theocracy the Irish republic endured, and the apparent corruption of the political system, was the whole independence thing really worth it?

And every time, you remind them: yes. We were a colony. We were stripped of land, language, identity. We were routinely demonised and patronised.

Of course, there is complexity in this: over 800 years, things are bound to get complicated. People moved back and forth, some colonists became ?more Irish than the Irish themselves?, some Irish people took enthusiastically to Britishness and the British empire. Many more joined the civil service, the police, the army out of simple economic necessity.

But the fight for freedom was worth it, because at least most people in Ireland now have some control of the country?s future. No revolution was ever perfect: the idyllic republic has never been achieved. But at least we can make some attempt to achieve it on our terms.

And it needed to be on our terms because we were not, and never would be viewed as equals by the British establishment. Every Irish person in Britain knows the little nod, the little wink. More often now it is disguised as affection, or indulgence (?Oh, you funny people? is always implied). But the undertones are the same: feckless, violent, drunken. And occasionally, someone like Clarkson, who, as better writers than I have pointed out, is simultaneously at the very heart of the Establishment while feigning to rail against it, will let it all spill out, in full vitriol. And we?re back with an image that easily resonates with Irish people: an English toff assaulting a ?lazy? Irish lackey for not doing his bidding. What we hoped we?d be able to leave behind.

[red devil]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Written March 2015

Source?...

[Earl Aelfheah]

It seems unlikely from the accounts I've heard that the motivation behind the attack was the individual's race. I suspect that they were abused because Clarkson didn't approve of the dinner he was served. It's shameful and pathetic behaviour, but a racially motivated attack?

[Mick Mac]

Some Irish bloke.

http://littleatoms.com/society/jeremy-clarkson-and-being-lazy-irish-britain

[Alan Medic]

I'm one Irish person who doesn't know what nod and wink is being referred to in the last paragraph.

[rodneybewes]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It seems unlikely from the accounts I've heard

> that the motivation behind the attack was the

> individual's race. I suspect that they were abused

> because Clarkson didn't approve of the dinner he

> was served. It's shameful and pathetic behaviour,

> but a racially motivated attack?

Is anyone actually saying it was racially motivated? I thought it was motivated by Clarkson being his usual utterly twattish self with the use of the victim's nationality as an accompanying insult being a racially aggravating factor.

Not aimed at you Rah Rah Rah but I'm always amazed by the fawning over Clarkson in this country and the many apologists for the man who happily used the N word on camera and made a joke about Asians being "slopes". Well done to the producer for putting this kind of stuff on the record - hopefully he will be getting extra cash from the BBC as they tolerated the unfunny, boorish fool's behaviour for way too long. I hope he lightens Clarkson's pocket a fair wedge while he's at it too.

[Otta]

Just a nasty pissed up dick who is used to getting his way abusing an underling. Not sure race had any part of it really.

[red devil]

I'm still not buying the Irish are a distinct race...nationality, yes