Further concerns on free speech and media coverage on grooming case in the UK

[ArMaP]

I was watching a clip of a Higher league U.K football team the other day and it seemed almost all the players were mixed race...there was not even many if an Black or White players amongst them.

OK, lets talk about football players. Who are the top two football players today? According to most people, Leonel Messi, from Argentina, and Cristiano Ronaldo, from Portugal. Neither of them is mixed-race.

Same racial characteristics are better for some things than others, but mixing them doesn't create a super man. For example, most marathon champions are from a specific area in Africa, either from Kenya or Ethiopia. But you won't find a black swimming champion, a sport dominated by whites because (apparently) of physical racial characteristics, with black people being less buoyant. This doesn't mean that a mixing a Kenyan and an Australian would give a marathon and swimming champion, as both characteristics would be "diluted" by the mixing.

but thats because their own govts or who ever has made their own Countries bad..

In most cases, it was European and other western countries that made their countries bad, by using them just as a source for cheap natural resources and cheap labour.
One example I read several years ago: in an African country they thought there was oil, so all the big companies went there and made tests. They found oil, so what they do? They move their specialised technicians from their country of origin (in Europe, in that case) and hire local manual workers. After several years the oil runs out and the company leaves the country, moving all the high-paying jobs back to Europe. In Africa they leave manual workers unemployed and depleted natural resources, so that African country gained nothing (maybe except for some high-ranking politicians that got some money from the oil company "under the table" to accept them instead of the competition). What would have been the best way of doing things? At least create schools so local people could learn those highly specialised jobs. While there wasn't enough specialised workers they could use those from Europe, but reducing the numbers as long as the local schools started sending out local specialised workers. Those schools could even teach how to look for more oil and how to care of the land after the oil company finished its work there, so they could help the country recover a little.

Why nobody does this? Because it costs money that is left in (in this case) Africa, so the European company gains nothing from doing it. Why doesn't the African country does that? Because they do not have the money for specialised schools, as they do not have to teachers and have to "import" them from the same countries from where the oil companies come.

20 years after, what the sons and daughters of those African manual workers can do? They know life is better in that European country and that it's easy to travel in Europe, so they can try their luck on that country or some other, so they try it, as life in their own country is as it was 30 or 40 years before and they see no way of things getting better.

if we see the world as one country.... then our racial mix worldwide is how the World Populace maybe become..

I don't see the world as one country, but I see humans as just one species, so I see no reasons to make things more difficult to some just because of something they cannot control.