Sir Muhammad

First topic message reminder :

Muhammad Ali knighthood petition gathering pace with Anthony Joshua and London mayor Boris Johnson among those calling for boxing legend to be honoured
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-3466162/Muhammad-Ali-knighthood-petition-gathering-pace-Anthony-Joshua-London-mayor-Boris-Johnson-calling-boxing-legend-honoured.html

The petition launched for boxing legend Muhammad Ali to receive an honorary knighthood is quickly gathering pace.

Ali is due in London in the next few days to open a major exhibition at the O2 Arena dedicated to his life and career; and 12,000 people have already signed a Change.org campaign set up by former world heavyweight champion David Haye.

London mayor Boris Johnson, Olympic boxing champions Anthony Joshua and Nicola Adams, and Hollywood actor Luke Evans, are among those demanding Britain honours the star widely regarded as 'The Greatest' in his sport.

As well as for his prowess in the ring, Ali is also lauded for his contribution towards the fight against racism, while his refusal to fight in the Vietnam war confirmed his status as a pop culture icon.

Olympic gold medallist Joshua, now bidding to win the world heavyweight title, told the London Evening Standard: 'What makes Ali such a role model is the battles he had to go through. He was fighting through the civil rights movement.

'He was more than just a boxer, he was a leader for many people.'

Conservative Party MP Johnson added: 'As a child, bashing the top of an old ropey black and white telly, I would sit mesmerised by grainy images of a hero who seemed to float above his opponents: the grace, guile, speed of hand.

'From race relations to religious freedom, he fought tireless and principled struggles all his life. I can't think of a more fitting recipient of an honorary knighthood.'

Previous non-UK nationals to have received honorary knighthoods include the late broadcaster Terry Wogan, U2 lead singer Bono and film director Steven Spielberg.

Ali, now aged 74 suffering from Parkinson's disease, won 56 of his 61 professional fights and became the undisputed world heavyweight champion hanging up his gloves in 1981.

Happy I think you have issues you don't like Ali but it's deeper then that. You are very ignorant and naive some of the dumb sh@t you have said is your own opinion that you think is clever but it's not. You talk about topics as if you were an expert or personally familiar with the subject like Ali changing his name? What the f@ck has that got to do with anything if you ain't black then you won't understand. Your opinion is your own but be grateful you can spout your obviously Jim crow like views on the net because your coward a%% won't say this face to face.

In case anyone wasn't sure before, there goes the race card......

Didn't Ali go to Iraq during the first gulf war to negotiate release of American hostages?
Might be worth remembering the totality of the man's life.

Knighthoods are beyond stupid mind you, give him something useful like a tesco's club card.

Haha

Anyway....

If he felt like changing from Cassius to a lesser slave name than that's his perogative (saying that The NOI probably whispered this bit in his ear). Whether that hurt his parents or not is neither here nor there. I've got lots of mates who've dropped their anglicised or Christian names because they'd rather not be reminded of the fact that their ancestors were oppressed (qualifer: in this case I don't mean legally dropped a la Ali, just stopped using it for legal purposes and switched to their African name)

Regarding Ali refusing the draft: Ali refused to fight for a country who treated him like dirt first and foremost. He'd already (most probably purposely) flunked the mental exam (which was subsequently lowered to make him eligible) before citing his religious beliefs (as a reason to preclude him from joining up).

Few points:

1. Ali would never have seen combat and so the idea his refusal had something to do with the idea that murder conflicted with his beliefs is questionable.
2. Ali's objection more likely stemmed from his hatred of the establishment - of white America. Why would he fight for a country he hated (at that time)?
3. I also long wondered whether he himself held a suspicion he could be "gotten rid of" while serving his time - he'd seen other outspoken black men assassinated and had received numerous death threats himself. As the mouthpiece for the NOI - he'd put himself at risk - no question.

Adam D wrote:Don't usually make banning a public but I think it's important this time.

Onetwoforever is taken a lovely 48 hours in the sin bin.

Now you may ask why.

Let me share something with you. I hate racism. But there is one thing I hate worse than racism and that's racists calling everyone else racist.

The whole "you wouldn't understand if your not black" is tiresome. Basically what you are saying is that you can't have a opinion (one that is usually more balanced I might add) unless you are (in this case) black.

I advise you to take the time off to reassess the labels you apply to people and your general attitude.

Have a nice day all. Or in the case of 1/2, two days.

I'm no fan of Ali, mainly because I found his opponent bating cruel and embarrassing, but ONETWOFOREVER has every right to be offended by "HappyTravelling's" comments.

HappyTravelling wrote:Sorry Hammer, that's slightly weak. MLK and literally millions of poor African Americans managed to show integrity and moral fortitude to not react to hate with hate.

=> Being the judge of how ALL Africans should behave

HappyTravelling wrote:I'm not being overly critical. Even Ali, if he held any principles as he claimed, must have realised the NoI were racist ...

=> implying equivalence of Black and White prejudice in 1960s America.

HappyTravelling is a troll. He is hiding divisive and inflammatory comments under a veneer of polite reasonableness.

One more thing, it sounds like you're calling ONETWOFOREVER a racist. I'm struggling to see any racism in what he has written - he's clearly upset and angry because he's forgotten his spelling mistakes, but i can't see the racist bit. Come to think of it I can't see him accusing HT of being a racist either - only that he doubts his ability to truly empathise with Ali's decision to change his name as a presumably white man.

Now I think you saying this is just odd:

I hate racism. But there is one thing I hate worse than racism and that's racists calling everyone else racist.

And you are on very shaky ground with this one:

The whole "you wouldn't understand if your not black" is tiresome.

I advise you to be grateful that you got a free forum with all these knowledgeable posters following the disbanding of the 606 forum on the BBC site. Perhaps you should keep you middlebrow off-topic observations to yourself.

ONETWO has popped back on to back himself up with another profile then.

hazharrison wrote:Regarding Ali refusing the draft: Ali refused to fight for a country who treated him like dirt first and foremost. He'd already (most probably purposely) flunked the mental exam (which was subsequently lowered to make him eligible) before citing his religious beliefs (as a reason to preclude him from joining up).

Few points:

1. Ali would never have seen combat and so the idea his refusal had something to do with the idea that murder conflicted with his beliefs is questionable.
2. Ali's objection more likely stemmed from his hatred of the establishment - of white America. Why would he fight for a country he hated (at that time)?
3. I also long wondered whether he himself held a suspicion he could be "gotten rid of" while serving his time - he'd seen other outspoken black men assassinated and had received numerous death threats himself. As the mouthpiece for the NOI - he'd put himself at risk - no question.  

I hadn't ever quite thought of your number 3 truth be told.

I think Ali's original principles were probably more of a selfish nature however his stance changed and became more of a culturally moral stance the longer it played out
Clearly because this seemed like a way it could work out for him well he stuck with this, you can say lots of things to try to bring down Ali's character and name however the way things ended up playing out (probably nor entirely the way Ali intended them) the result was still generally OK, so I can't see why HT is getting SO knickers in a twist mode, but clearly he feels rather strongly on the subject.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:ONETWO has popped back on to back himself up with another profile then.

Highly likely, but at least this OneTwo is slightly more succinct.

'Guest' is a muppet. And either is a 1/2 alias or doesn't know him at all - or he'd know the vast history of race card playing on here. It's pathetic and it is conceited. As Adam has said, HT has put his views forwards in a very erudite & balance manner - not with any of the race-baiting bluster of 1/2.


On topic, I think there are reflections ofthe boxing hall of fame here - i.e. there must be a fair few 'ropey' receipients therefore is it really that high/low a bar for Ali??

Ali the person, in 60s/70s etc, was not somebody I could like, and I don't think the excuses put forward are fair & reasonable either, however he has done a lot in later life that's worthy of recognition and I was quite moved at his involvement in London 2012.

Talk about an unwelcome Guest.

If ever we needed proof that the ONETWO user is an persona/troll, then guest is it.

I'll draw people back to my original point and objection, which was the quote:

'From race relations to religious freedom, he fought tireless and principled struggles all his life'

Yet, it doesn't seem even his most fervent supporter agrees he was all his life.

But the quote exemplifies the myth that Rowley and I are challenging, one where he becomes more saintly with passing years.

I fully acknowledge his talent, fortitude, charisma etc but I do think people are being less critical of an idol, as people are want to do.

As Haz has said, there are more simple straightforward, selfish reasons for him to not take the draft than his preferred PR of saying he was a conscientious objector. He has form lying in this area, as I pointed out with the famous medal story. He maintained that lie for over 20yrs preferring the public believing he made a principled gesture.

I think he's a more simple and less flattering character than his fans wish to believe, that's all.

These weren't principled stands, he was just a young, angry man who realised principles were a more socially acceptable justification, so that's the line he spun. Doesn't really make him better or worse than many young men.

But, it doesn't make him principled, during that period. And I gave many examples where he was anything but.

Obviously he's matured with age and it would be odd if he didn't. But the reasons people give for his 'greatness' are not what he did when he got older, they are his refusal to take the draft etc and they do it for erroneous reasons.

And sorry, I don't swallow the shpeel that he should be forgiven everything because he was black and from the south. I can understand him being angry but siding with racists against racism is a clear hypocrisy that shows he wasn't measured and principled. Frazier was also black and from a much more disadvantaged background.

We talk about racists on this sight and here is a person who, for the significant period of his life, was a member of a racist organisation, who alined with the kkk, who made clearly obnoxious comments about interracial relationships and people seem very willing to forgive him, for being Ali. I just wonder if the same people are equally forgiving of other reformed racists? Perhaps there's hope for duke yet?

Great fighter, great personality but angry young man, exploited by the NoI, who grew up and matured.

I'm not Ali's biggest fan by any stretch. If he was fighting Frazier today, I'd want Frazier to win but having said that, I've got nothing against him being knighted (even though I think it's a useless honour).

The thing about Frazier perhaps being more disadvantaged than Ali doesn't mean a lot to me. All people do not react the same. Some people get bitter, angry and show their feelings, some people bottle things up and hold everything inside. It's possible that Frazier just bottled up his feelings. Either way I'm not sure why they have to be compared. Some blacks marched and fought for their rights to vote, and some stayed at home preferring not to get into trouble. Quite possible that Frazier was the type who preferred to stay at home and not get into trouble (and there's nothing wrong with that if that's what he did).

As for the line 'From race relations to religious freedom, he fought tireless and principled struggles all his life'. Well who can claim to have fought for something their whole lives? Boris gets a little too excited maybe? And I'm sure that he has seen some of Ali's less savoury comments from his youth.

Wouldn't put David Duke and Ali in the same bracket either just because Ali met some leaders from the KKK, unless of course there's evidence of the NOI burning crosses outside peoples homes, bombing churches and lynching white people.

Have you read ghosts of Manila HT. Suspect you'd enjoy it. Offers a nice counter view to the usual writing on Ali. Don't agree with all of it but definitely food for thought.

Happy/Rowley

Churchill is considered a hero by many in the west he is nicknamed the greatest Briton but many view him as a war criminal who sanctioned the extermination of Germany's civilian population through indiscriminate bombing.

Now, no doubt you will refute this and say he was just doing his duty at a time of war, which in turn would justify my stance on Ali. You want to judge a man for his past actions and you both are happy to ignore the social climate at the time. Its almost as if you expect Ali and people like him to be perfect human beings living to your standards.

I don't judge Churchill for his actions and still consider him a hero of Britain and the west and don't question the titles awarded him because of what he meant to his people.

CHURCHILL IN HIS OWN WORDS
(During first World War): “Perhaps the next time round the way to do it will be to kill women, children and the civilian population.”

Churchill on defending the morality of bombing from the air: “Now everyone’s at it. It’s simply a question of fashion – similar to that of whether short or long dresses are in.”
“I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.”

Writing as president of the Air Council, 1919.
“It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the east, striding half naked up the steps of the viceregal palace, while he is still organising and conducting a campaign of civil disobedience, to parlay on equal terms with the representative of the Emperor-King.”
Commenting on Gandhi’s meeting with the Viceroy of India, 1931.

“I do not admit… that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia… by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race… has come in and taken its place.”

Churchill to Palestine Royal Commission, 1937.
“The choice was clearly open: crush them with vain and unstinted force, or try to give them what they want. These were the only alternatives and most people were unprepared for either. Here indeed was the Irish spectre – horrid and inexorcisable.”
Writing in The World Crisis and the Aftermath, 1923-31.

“The unnatural and increasingly rapid growth of the feeble-minded and insane classes, coupled as it is with a steady restriction among all the thrifty, energetic and superior stocks, constitutes a national and race danger which it is impossible to exaggerate… I feel that the source from which the stream of madness is fed should be cut off and sealed up before another year has passed.”

Churchill to Asquith, 1910.
“One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations.”
From his Great Contemporaries, 1937.

you can both get off your high horses now.

It's reassuring to know onetwo puts his bans to good use, by brushing up on a bit of history.

As a man who likes a good conspiracy theory I'm surprised you missed the sinking of the Lusitania.

I said it earlier but I like repeating myself. People are largely a product of their times and circumstances. And should be judged with that as a baseline. I wouldn't criticise Ali for what he did in his youth for that reason, nor would I deify it. I would remind people though that this isn't Ali self promoting... Claiming to have been something he wasn't... It's others getting a little carried away on his behalf.

milky

I agree with you my issue with happy is he pours scorn on statements made by Ali at the time which had I been around back then I would have agreed with. Does not make what he said right but reflects the feelings of AA at a time of upheaval and awakening. To dismiss it as racist and un democratic is cheap and simple.

He singles out Ali and the Noi meeting with the KKK. So what? Had the government led by example this meeting need not have taken place. And the meeting was to avoid a race war that many believed was about to go down. I like the idea of the blacks meeting with the KKK it suggests that people vehemently opposed to one another can sit down as equals and open up a dialogue. Something the government was un willing to do.

I am offended by Happys statements.

I am offended by people being offended especially when they use this as an opportunity to start slinging around terms like "racist" or taking the moral high ground as their skin is a particular colour which they consider gives them, and only them, the right to offer an opinion on something.

One does not have to have been a victim of racial abuse, human trafficking, sex trafficking, female genital mutilation, child abuse, spousal abuse, sexual assault or a whole host of other dreadful things to have an opinion on them.

Sadly it appears that, despite a much welcomed ban, cooler heads have still not prevailed.

DAVE667 wrote:I am offended by people being offended especially when they use this as an opportunity to start slinging around terms like "racist" or taking the moral high ground as their skin is a particular colour which they consider gives them, and only them, the right to offer an opinion on something.

One does not have to have been a victim of racial abuse, human trafficking, sex trafficking, female genital mutilation, child abuse, spousal abuse, sexual assault or a whole host of other dreadful things to have an opinion on them.

Sadly it appears that, despite a much welcomed ban, cooler heads have still not prevailed.

True as this may be... you think they give a Frak about an opinion coming from someone who's never been there? Certainly don't see anyone debating whether or not victims of genital mutilation should have had lunch with their abusers on the 14th of March 1967, or gone to fight in a war for them

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Happy/Rowley

Churchill is considered a hero by many in the west he is nicknamed the greatest Briton but many view him as a war criminal who sanctioned the extermination of Germany's civilian population through indiscriminate bombing.

Now, no doubt you will refute this and say he was just doing his duty at a time of war, which in turn would justify my stance on Ali. You want to judge a man for his past actions and you both are happy to ignore the social climate at the time. Its almost as if you expect Ali and people like him to be perfect human beings living to your standards.

I don't judge Churchill for his actions and still consider him a hero of Britain and the west and don't question the titles awarded him because of what he meant to his people.

CHURCHILL IN HIS OWN WORDS
(During first World War): “Perhaps the next time round the way to do it will be to kill women, children and the civilian population.”

Churchill on defending the morality of bombing from the air: “Now everyone’s at it. It’s simply a question of fashion – similar to that of whether short or long dresses are in.”
“I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.”

Writing as president of the Air Council, 1919.
“It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the east, striding half naked up the steps of the viceregal palace, while he is still organising and conducting a campaign of civil disobedience, to parlay on equal terms with the representative of the Emperor-King.”
Commenting on Gandhi’s meeting with the Viceroy of India, 1931.

“I do not admit… that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia… by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race… has come in and taken its place.”

Churchill to Palestine Royal Commission, 1937.
“The choice was clearly open: crush them with vain and unstinted force, or try to give them what they want. These were the only alternatives and most people were unprepared for either. Here indeed was the Irish spectre – horrid and inexorcisable.”
Writing in The World Crisis and the Aftermath, 1923-31.

“The unnatural and increasingly rapid growth of the feeble-minded and insane classes, coupled as it is with a steady restriction among all the thrifty, energetic and superior stocks, constitutes a national and race danger which it is impossible to exaggerate… I feel that the source from which the stream of madness is fed should be cut off and sealed up before another year has passed.”

Churchill to Asquith, 1910.
“One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations.”
From his Great Contemporaries, 1937.

you can both get off your high horses now.

So what's your point? That people frequently deified don't deserve the unquestioning adoration and praise often heaped on them? Glad to see you agree with us.

milkyboy wrote:It's reassuring to know onetwo puts his bans to good use, by brushing up on a bit of history.

As a man who likes a good conspiracy theory I'm surprised you missed the sinking of the Lusitania.

I said it earlier but I like repeating myself. People are largely a product of their times and circumstances. And should be judged with that as a baseline. I wouldn't criticise Ali for what he did in his youth for that reason, nor would I deify it. I would remind people though that this isn't Ali self promoting... Claiming to have been something he wasn't... It's others getting a little carried away on his behalf.

Luisitania is true though, America's way of walking into the war.

'You want to judge a man for his past actions and you both are happy to ignore the social climate at the time.'

Actually onetwo, it's similar to me. I'm not necessarily judging him but I am pointing out, at best, his huge errors in judgement, at worst his racism, when others want to whitewash this and swallow every justification he gave for his actions.

Ironically, Churchill is a decent parallel, although arguably the period of reference is much greater. When people exalt Churchill they are referring to his half a century in the public eye, when he committed acts of gross incompetence, Dardenels, gold standard, but also showed great foresight wrt Nazism and great leadership. Whereas most people don't know any more about Ali than a few fights and his symbolic 'human rights' acts, throwing the medal in the river and refusing the draft. Which is the point, one is a lie and the other is questionable whether Ali was making a moral point or simply 'sticking it to the man'. There's no doubts Churchill was right about Hitler and was a good war time leader.

I've had a few beers so, I'll reveal some of my genuine feelings on this. I think there is some compensating racism going on, as people who want to be seen as 'virtuous' do.

If a white supremacists from Anacostia, Greenmount or south central (think American History X) said, they thought white women should be killed if they slept with a black man everybody here would call them a violent racist and beyond reproach, even if this was the 60's and they could say they felt victimised growing up in black neighbourhoods, and I've hear interviews with plenty of supremacists who claim their views came from being picked on by black people.

However, for some reason, Ali is exempt from such moral scrutiny. It's OK because he is black. Which, quite frankly, is patronising and racist. Why should the white commenters hold Ali by lower moral standards when the vast majority of black people in the south transcended that reaction. The vast majority realised siding with the KKK put them in the same category.

I don't dislike Ali for it, he was young and young people do silly things but the period in his life people hold up as the example of his stand on human rights was this period, and as I've already highlighted, it's highly questionable whether he was making a moral stand at all.

P.S I know American History X they were from Venice Beach.

More succinctly, I fully understand why people react and can easily forgive them for bad judgement and reactions.

However, that is the total opposite to showing good judgement and being principled. Which was the subject of this discussion.

You still act as if you have a single idea about the situation.

You are judging this from your own standerds and beliefs. My point is yes Ali said some things back then that seem racist to you but Ali was never a racist.

Ali is called racist because he expressed his pride and love for his people and not just the blacks but others to. Ali preached the importance of self worth and identity among African Americans. He advised them to love themselves at a time when anything associated with blackness was negative.

You see happy there are things you just wont understand unless you are willing to see things through different eyes. I have developed this ability. I dont support far right nationalists like Britian first or UKIP but I fully understand that these people are speaking on topics that may seem racist but are important to them. I fully understand the fears people have of ''others'' flooding their country and don't in any way chastise them for it.

Ali meant a lot to all races of people. He is a hero for his stance on the vietnam war which you stupidly question as to his ''real'' motives because you lack understanding that is available to you.....

“Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go 10,000 miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on Brown people in Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs and denied simple human rights? No I’m not going 10,000 miles from home to help murder and burn another poor nation simply to continue the domination of white slave masters of the darker people the world over. This is the day when such evils must come to an end. I have been warned that to take such a stand would cost me millions of dollars. But I have said it once and I will say it again. The real enemy of my people is here. I will not disgrace my religion, my people or myself by becoming a tool to enslave those who are fighting for their own justice, freedom and equality. If I thought the war was going to bring freedom and equality to 22 million of my people they wouldn’t have to draft me, I’d join tomorrow. I have nothing to lose by standing up for my beliefs. So I’ll go to jail, so what? We’ve been in jail for 400 years.”

If you are pro establishment, pro apartheid, pro Iraq war, pro oppression then this Ali qoute will upset you but if you are pro peace, freedom, and justice then you will see the wisdom in it.

In truth Ali is better then a knighthood, he spoke the truth to the establishment themselves and he is a hero for all those that stand up to the establishment and its crookedness today.

AlexHuckerby wrote:

milkyboy wrote:It's reassuring to know onetwo puts his bans to good use, by brushing up on a bit of history.

As a man who likes a good conspiracy theory I'm surprised you missed the sinking of the Lusitania.

I said it earlier but I like repeating myself. People are largely a product of their times and circumstances. And should be judged with that as a baseline. I wouldn't criticise Ali for what he did in his youth for that reason, nor would I deify it. I would remind people though that this isn't Ali self promoting... Claiming to have been something he wasn't... It's others getting a little carried away on his behalf.

Luisitania is true though, America's way of walking into the war.

I picked it as the most famous example cited of churchill's ruthless streak (along with inducing the blitz by bombing Berlin, to save the Kent airfields... Another much debated and ultimately unproven theory). He was certainly a man who understood/believed that the end sometimes justified the means. It's still never been proven how much the Lusitania sinking was down to incompetence v deliberate ignorance/conspiracy v just being one of those things that can happen in war. No doubt it played a part in swaying US public opinion into joining ww1 but it took 2 years.

Churchill is on record as saying he wants neutral shipping to come to the uk and get sunk, to get the Americans outraged - which is where the theory stems from I think... But the Lusitania was a British ship, that happened to have Americans on board, not really the same thing.

Churchill was a great and remarkable man, no doubt he had a hell of a ruthless streak... At a time when the UK needed a leader with one. As per Ali, he needs to be judged by the times and circumstances... Which were both pretty dire!

'My point is yes Ali said some things back then that seem racist to you but Ali was never a racist.'

I stopped reading at that point. Saying black women who sleep with white men should be killed is about as racist as it gets. It doesn't 'appear racist' it is racist.

So, he had a meeting with the kkk to discuss their similar views, believed in killing people for interracial congress (just like the clan) and donated large sums of money to the NoI, who's leader gave regular racist speeches and up until recently it's leaders were openly anti Semitic, Farrakhan's 'admiration' of Hitler.

So, Ali spoke with the clan, expressed views similar to the clan but the clan are racist and he wasn't?

Now, I can accept he grew up, matured and left those opinions behind but he did hold those views. They're on celluloid and in print. You can see his interview where he admits to talking to the clan. You can read his playboy interview. It's deeply racist.

I can accept he grew out of those views, as many people do. But the NoI were a niche organisation till his fame made it more popular. As I keep pointing out, the vast majority of African Americans could and can see the hypocrisy of objecting racism by siding with racists or pursuing racist objectives. It's why the NoI were such a small group, until then. I believe Louis and MLK made comments alluding to his selectivity. Although it's late so can't remember what they were. I think Louis made comments about he should be champion to everybody and MLK made comments about him being aligned to the NoI.

Which brings us back to your Churchill analogy, I don't think even Churchill fans are apologists for his mistakes. They admit and acknowledge his mistakes. They could easily make up contrived excuses for his mistakes citing his upbringing and era he was in. But they don't.

You're being an apologist for Ali. He did hold deeply racist views at that point, it's there on film and in print.

Just to note, Malcolm X, then Ali left the NoI, and in Malcolm's case he indirectly admitted because he realised the folly of their racist views. So, they had him killed....

So Churchil made mistakes but Ali is a all out bonifide racist?

Churchil said worse things then Ali that pretty much revealed him as a white supremacist and you call them mistakes???

Point is I still regard Churchil as a great hero of this nation and understand he was raised in an era where his type of thinking was the norm in fact it was mainstream ideology. Never heard of anyone challenging his various titles.

Yet you seem obsessed with using Ali's past against him.

'Churchil said worse things then Ali'

Sorry, I missed Churchill saying people should be killed because they slept with someone of a different race. I also missed his film footage where he said he'd talked to Nazi Germany about their similar view points.

Nice try, but no cigar.

Churchill certainly was a colonial throw back but his inner instincts were to see Nazism for what it was. He also realised Islam had issues. He had throw backs and hangups but was a deeper thinker.

Ali, in his youth, was a reactionary not a thinker, which is the point of this discussion. I have no problems with his later life just the fact misappropriate his actions and narrative in his early life.

'Churchil said worse things then Ali'

Sorry, I missed Churchill saying people should be killed because they slept with someone of a different race. I also missed his film footage where he said he'd talked to Nazi Germany about their similar view points.

Nice try, but no cigar.

Churchill certainly was a colonial throw back but his inner instincts were to see Nazism for what it was. He also realised Islam had issues. He had throw backs and hangups but was a deeper thinker.

Ali, in his youth, was a reactionary not a thinker, which is the point of this discussion. I have no problems with his later life just the fact misappropriate his actions and narrative in his early life.

'Churchil said worse things then Ali that pretty much revealed him as a white supremacist and you call them mistakes???'

I'll make this easy, post Ali's playboy interview, word for word, and then post the Churchill quotes in repost that prove he was more of a racist than Ali. I dare you.

I already have if you bothered to read my posts on this thread in fact I posted quite a few but here;s a ''mistake'' as you put it.....

“I do not admit… that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia… by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race… has come in and taken its place.”

Are you going to quote Elijah Mohammed about white devil's and black superiority, you know, the group that Ali donated a significant amount of money to.

Further, Where does Churchill take such an extremely racist standpoint where he says people deserve to be killed for interracial interactions?

Ali does that:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/4727159/Lets-not-pretend-Ali-was-Gandhi.html

You take a few racist quotes from Churchill, ignore similar views by Ali and totally ignore much more extreme views by Ali and pretend they're the same.

Again, not even close and no cigar.

Churchill stood up against fascism, Ali is on film admitting he joined fascists. What is your point?

You're a joke

and you have been found out. You can't see the racial standpoint in this....

“I do not admit… that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia… by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race… has come in and taken its place.”

If you can't see the seriousness in the systematic genocide of both the Native American Indians and the Native Aborigines then you must be a wum or maybe I was right the first time.

I could post more if you STILL need convincing

Sorry onetwo you're the joke in your blindness.

Churchill acknowledged injustice and superiority. He is totally vague as to the source of that superiority, whether it be temporary or not. Technological superiority of the 'white' race etc. But certainly, when it came to WWII and when Islam, he stood against fascism, that there is no doubt.

Ali was unequivocal, black people should die if they fratinised with white people. There is no nice interpretation of that.

Happytravelling wrote:Churchill stood up against fascism, Ali is on film admitting he joined fascists. What is your point?

Dumb statement.

Firstly you say Churchill stood up to fascism, yet he clearly admired Hitler....

“One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations.”

Secondly you keep bringing up Ali meeting the KKK, tell me who was worse the KKK or the government who sanctioned such racist laws as black people denied the vote, denied equal education, and equal rights and even sitting where ever they damn well pleased on a bus.

Your point has been lost in your obvious hate for Ali and yet you post here as some heroic crusader against racism yet Churchill obvious racist ideology amounts to nothing more then a mistake.

Go to bed......you've lost.

It's possible to see Churchill's comments being about culture/technology/crude views of 'civilisation' at the time, call them what you will. But Ali's comments about killing people based on who they slept with and their skin colour is base racism at its worst.

Happytravelling wrote:It's possible to see Churchill's comments being about culture/technology/crude views of 'civilisation' at the time, call them what you will. But Ali's comments about killing people based on who they slept with and their skin colour is base racism at its worst.

Clearly you are what you are.

Was the Holocast about culture/technology?????

I will alert the MODS on this and it would be interesting to see if they punish you as they did me earlier in the thread when I implied your motives as suspect.

If I had made a statement on here defending racist ideology or thought I would be banned.

'Dumb statement.'

Not at all. You're just (deliberately) conflating issues. Your very example is contrived and poor:

Firstly you say Churchill stood up to fascism, yet he clearly admired Hitler....

“One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement.'

You're trying to conflate fascism with patriotism. Few people world do that. You're a deliberate and shameless liar.

Your government and KKK bs is just further obfuscation. Was the KKK wrong or not? If they were, why did Ali meet them to discuss their common objectives?

You need to go to bed, defending those who advocate murder for simply sleeping with someone of a different race and pretending we there is equivalence to Churchill saying stone age cultures would inevitably demise.

Hang your head in shame for supporting naked racism.

'I will alert the MODS on this and it would be interesting to see if they punish you as they did me earlier in the thread when I implied your motives as suspect.'

Please do. I simply highlight possible interpretations.

There are absolutely no possible interpretations to Ali's comments about black men and women being killed JUST BECAUSE they sleep with white people. It's very clear racism. You can't pretend there may be other mitigating circumstances. But you keep defending them.

Churchill talks of races, when race, nation and culture were relatively synonymous, due to limited racial, national and cultural mixing.

You're defending blatant racism. Give it up.

'If I had made a statement on here defending racist ideology or thought I would be banned.'

Let me help you with your racist views.

If I had said a person who believed all gypsies who slept with white people should be killed, I'd be an extreme racist. If I said, gypsies are synonymous with theft, I'd be questionably racist. There's no doubt their transient lifestyle gave greater latitude to theft but it would be racist to assume they're all thieves.

Does that help you to get define between violent and unequivocal racists and those who are simply making clumsy generalisations?

Maybe you need a history lesson.

It seems you think when the colonists arrived at the America's and Australia, that they took the land with a simple shake of the hand. In reality inhumane atrocities were carried out too many to mention for it to be as simple as cultural and technological development.

Please whatever you do, do not repeat this to anyone of Aboriginal and Native American decent because BELIEVE me they will be offended.

Now you say I am defending Ali's racism. PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE I DID SO. In actual fact I have stated that his words were racist back then and have used the word racist to describe them but Ali is still alive and is not a racist.

As for Churchill I have posted his obvious racist views but have also accepted that he is a hero to Britain and really have no issue with his titles awarded him as he was a great leader.

In closing, the OP asked if Ali deserved a knighthood. We differ on the answer to this but you should really have left it there because you are sound silly.

'Now you say I am defending Ali's racism. PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE I DID SO.'

The numerous points where you tried to deminish Ali's violent racism by seeking equivalence with Churchill's (by modern standards) clumsy comments.

'Churchil said worse things then Ali that pretty much revealed him as a white supremacist and you call them mistakes???'

You're pretending that clearly advocating killing people just because of racial indiscretions is better than implying that some cultures are inferior (which has potential subjectivity).