Come on down, bob_loblaw!

The BBQ Pit
1

In this thread bob_loblaw tries to inject a racist hijack, but is swatted. I, however, found his intervention particularly distasteful.

Perhaps, bob_loblaw, you aren’t aware that bombs don’t discriminate on colour?

Perhaps, bob_loblaw, you didn’t bother to look at the photographs which show that people of all colours were hurt in the attack? You only have to go to the BBC website

Perhaps, bob_loblaw, you didn’t know that people of all colours are British citizens? Shock! Horror! There are even Persons of Colour in the House of Lords!

Perhaps, bob_loblaw, you aren’t aware that one of Tony Blair’s objectives for the G8 summit is to help Africa.

Perhaps, bob_loblaw, you don’t realise that you don’t have to be white to be racist? Remember Rwanda a few years back? Remember Japan in WW2?

Perhaps, bob_loblaw, you yourself are a racist idiot?

2

Perhaps you did not read the post where he said he was going away and will not be reading anymore posts…

3

Perhaps you missed the two other Pit threads on this guy?

4

Now bob_loblaw has three Pit threads going … He may be interesting, but he’s not that interesting.

5

Perhaps you should have started your post with “Perhaps” that would have been in keeping with the emerging trend.

6

Perhaps someone should start a spin-off thread asking for clarification on the policy of how may Pit threads about one person are needed.

7

Perhaps I should have gone with the flow … but then I’m often going aginst the flow.

8

I can only see one other pit thread mentioning him, and that’s started by him about a different topic. Perhaps the other thread’s been disappeared?

Anyway, the mods should feel free to merge this thread with the other if they see fit.

9

Perhaps they will. I hope not, this is perhaps the best thread today.

10

Perhaps you noticed that the other two pit threads were started by **bob_loblaw ** himself; somebody this incendiary certainly deserves a third-party pitting.

11

am i evil? am i deranged? or am i just rational? and oh, my foul language is so awful, but dying brown people are just fine & dandy! (both started by our friend bob_loblaw).

12

Perhaps if this pitting were actually of any literary interest, I might agree. As it is, the gentle scolding that we see in the OP could have easily been in the other threads, and have had the bonus of being on topic.

13

Why waste bandwidth on a third-party pitting when it’s just as easy to use his own threads?

14

Quartz, IMO, it’s not about racism.

I just wonder why you felt the need to Pit him. Is it in the name of racial equality or just scoring points for partisan politics?

Can you really deny that the western media places more importance on the tragic deaths of westerners (white or black or whatever - as I’ve said in the original thread it’s more about the perception of “our kind” than race per se)?

In more compassionate, human terms - he was simply acting out his own form of grief. Can’t you understand that?

Really, what’s your beef? Do you doubt he feels bad about the carnage that occurred yesterday?

I don’t think you do.

15

That’s totally beside the point of the thread that he posted in (and he was making personal insults in a forum where that is not allowed, to boot.) bob_loblaw can start as many threads about inequalities in news reporting as he likes (and probably should; it would be a fascinating subject), but he needs to keep his opinions about that subject out of threads that don’t pertain to it.

16

I don’t really see the reason of all the antagonism and indignation to bob_loblaw’s post about the flag flying.

He only mentioned the truth that people who talk about flying flags are somewhat biased and prejudiced in their behaviour.

If the act is to mourn the killing of innocents, then the brush should apply equally to all innocents who are killed in terrorist attacks anywhere in the world. That however does not really happen!

bob_loblaw said that innocent Iraqis and Afghanistanis are dying everyday in terrorist attacks, and in fact on a much larger scale that what happened in London. That is indeed true. And he said that the American population, and the west in general, have not been showing the same level of sympathy and outpouring of grief and compassion compared to the response on attacks in UK. That too is true!

How many Spanish flags were flown after the terrorist attacks in Madrid? How many Indian flags were flown after the terrorist in 1993 that rocked Bombay killing 257 persons? Terrorist attacks, and consequent deaths, have become common all across the globe, yet how many Americans fly flags of countries affected?

Neither the compassion, nor its expression is the same!

I also know that the reason behind it is none other than the ease of identifying with the British compared to the others, especially since the UK is the only “significant” ally in the US’s so called “war on terror”. That’s all.

17

For the U.K. media, yes, I can. It places more importance on events it thinks will interest its audience. Colour isn’t relevant.

18

Quite a lot of the antagonism comes from the fact that he came out like a raging dick in the original MPSIMS thread.

True; to bad he poisoned his own message by coming out like a raging dick in the original MPSIMS thread.

It’s amazing that you can discern the motivations of everyone who decides to show some solidarity with the British, *and * that you know what everyone else has done or not done to show sympathy for all the other victims of terrorism, *and * that you can tell that all of us Americans are “especially” motivated by our enthusiasm for Mr. Bush’s war.

19

“Too bad”; “Too”. :smack:

20

As for “colour isn’t relevant” - yes, I agree with you. As I’ve said, I don’t think it’s about race (colour, ethnicity, etc.).

But think about your “will interest its audience” claim. Again, I agree; this is what the media tries to do, within its particular venue. So what will interest the British audience? The tragic death of “Britons” or the tragic death of “non-Britons”… Think think think…

Quartz, not trying to attack you personally here. I simply think it’s status quo for both the media and human impulse. No right or wrong ascribed; it simply is that way for human impulse, and understandably so.

But to attack those of us who point it out, or stand up to or break away from “the tribe” is quite another argument. Deny it, or attack it, or defend it - on that level. Otherwise, we have no argument.