Good afternoon.
The Society of Black Lawyers might, just might have their hearts in the right place. But clowns like Peter Herbert belting around unchecked with irrational crusades drag serious efforts against genuine racial equality into a politically correct black hole of Calcutta. Hopefully common sense asphyxiates and crushes his idiocies some time soon.
Herbert’s latest mandate free publicity stunt is a masterclass that may yet eclipse his last piece of stupidity. But first, let’s have look at Herbert [who unbelievably is a barrister] was on talkSPORT this week. Citing the case of Daniel Alley a footballer who happens to be deaf.
Alley was indeed abused by fans for a grunting noise he made when communicating with fellow players one specific instance is recorded in decent enough detail here. Yet Herbert insisted this was not primarily about the poor guy’s disability, but because he was, ‘an Afro Caribean player who happened to be deaf.’
Then he went on to tackle the whole Mark Clattenburg fiasco, ‘We’re not commentating on this, it’s a matter for the police to investigate. We’re not going to take part in any trial by the media.’
That was the quote folks! Herbert was then asked, ‘What evidence do you have?’
His reply: ‘I don’t have any evidence… a report …widely reported in the media of racial abuse that appears to have been made and we are entitled to report that to the police… it’s a racial incident…we, on the basis of the information before us, we have the right to report that as a racial incident.’
Eh?
This ambulance chasing schmuck is putting back the cause of black people faster than Ainsley Harriot’s TV appearances [and no Peter, I’m not singling out Harriot because he’s black. It’s purely on the basis he’s a hateful arsehole].
Thank goodness THFC have stepped in with some sanity in response to the aptly named Herbert’s latest brainwave:
“If neither Tottenham FC nor the FA are willing to take a stand then SBL will report the matter to the Metropolitan Police Service for investigation and, if necessary, prosecution. The report will be made if this behaviour does not cease by 20 November. We will have monitors in attendance to observe what occurs.”
THFC replied:
“Our position on this topic is very clear. The club does not tolerate any form of racist or abusive chanting. Our guiding principle in respect of the ‘Y-word’ is based on the point of law itself – the distinguishing factor is the intent with which it is used i.e. if it is used with the deliberate intention to cause offence. This has been the basis of prosecutions of fans of other teams to date.
“Our fans adopted the chant as a defence mechanism in order to own the term and thereby deflect anti-Semitic abuse. They do not use the term to others to cause any offence, they use it a chant amongst themselves.
“The club believes that real anti-Semitic abuse such as hissing to simulate the noise of gas chambers is the real evil and the real offence. We believe this is the area that requires a determined and concerted effort from all parties and where we seek greater support to eradicate.”
Perhaps if Herbert really cared, I mean really cared, then he could do something about the hissing noises. Perhaps if Herbert really cared, I mean really cared, then he could do something about the coin throwing. Perhaps if Herbert really cared, I mean really cared, then he could do something about the extraordinary Jew hating chants that we are routinely subjected to by Chelsea, a club now routinely referred to as The Blue Racists.
Of course Herbert won’t be remotely interested in this. It requires far deeper issues being investigated opposed to picking and choosing like some witless grandmother mithering over a tin of Quality Street she didn’t even pay for.
Let’s Kick This 100% Herbert Out Of Football.
http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2012/11/08/3511347/-
Great article. Top journalism. I especially love the one and only quote, which in no way shape or form substantiates the claim being made. The complete lack of any sources whatsoever, not even the made up kind, is also good.
Hahahha. Super comment.
Nobody expects the Society of Black Lawyers.
Can anyone confirm if Jermaine Defoe is, indeed, a Yiddo?
No, but some dodgy women can allegedly.
I’ve just tweeted the SBL, demanding that they cease using the B-word in their name, or I will take legal action.
I think that should settle this whole debacle… :-p
But that doesn’t make any sense. Ah well, not the first time, won’t be the last I suppose. :whistle:
I know it doesn’t. In my opinion it makes exactly as little sense as them insisting we stop using “YID” in our chants, or they’ll sue the club. That was the point.
Black is racist when used by racists. Yid is racist when used by racists. Take the racist out of the equation and they’re just words.
I realize it’s sarky, not constructive, and purile, and it’s never going to get them to see the error of their ways. But it sure felt good :freu
Apart from the brown shirt,nazi ingignia and heil hitlers how do you know if someone is a racist?
ingignia?
Without context, you don’t.
that was @ Mr. Wolman
Can sarcasm be racist?
what about descriptions of people?
a) He was a black bastard
b) he was Black
Where do you draw the line?
Pretty clear
a. racist, because the use of the word black is not to describe the ‘bastard’ but to add emphasis to it and embellish the insult. Unless you are talking about a literal bastard child, and describing them, that is.
b. descriptive, simple.
Ok then what about
a) He is a yid bastard
b)he is a yid
People used to mention ‘jew me down’ as derogatory even though scots do it more than my yids….that is all except Daniel the Great One
I’ve definitely many times called black friends “you black bastard”, when they were being a bastard. They didn’t think I was being a racist, probably because they know I’m not a racist.
Someone overhearing this might certainly be offended by this. But that also would not make it racist.
So I don’t really think you can go so far as to say that saying “he was a black bastard” is neccessarily racist. It certainly CAN be racist, though (“I’m going to kill him”…”Why?”…”He was a black bastard”). But whether something is racist or not doesn’t depend on which words were used or not. You can easily be racist without using any racist ‘buzzwords’ (“I believe anyone who isn’t white should be burned in a gas chamber”).
As I said, it all depends on the context. In fact, that’s not even it. It depends on the intent. And intent is very difficult or impossible to judge objectively.
It’s certainly can be a tricky issue, but more often than not common sense is a sufficient test. A bunch of people, many of them jewish, saying “YID” as a way of deflecting and diminishing the racism of others is quite obviously not racist. The only way you could think that is if you’re some kind of black lawyer or something…
I am deeply cynical about Peter Herbert’s motives in going public with his ill-judged and ill-timed remarks on racism at White Hart Lane.
Firstly; as the second generation mixed race immigrant myself, I can assure you that racism is a very broad subject and affects people of different ethnic origins and cultures in different ways. Racism is not black and white. To simply lump every ethnic group together and an attempt to paint them with the same brush, not only demonstrates a complete miss understanding of the matter but is also offensive and dare I say it … racist. We know that the ‘N’ word is an ugly word intended to incite and offend and that it has no place anywhere in today’s Britain. But it’s not the same word as ‘Yid’. There is a difference. The Yids at White Hart Lane are not horrified by its use and do not need a man with a racist view of racism to tell them that they should be offended.
This proposed Mary Whitehouse stance on racism will only make things worse and turn the whole issue into a joke. Getting this issue so wrong is a cringing embarrassment. No steps forward, two steps back. Peter Herbert should take his fight to the inner cities where he can make an actual difference to those who will benefit the most and gain a proper understanding into what racism actually is and how it affects people. Interfering with people who want to watch a football match in the same way that they have for years is nothing more than a cheap publicity stunt for which he should be ashamed.
The Premiership is the most lucrative domestic league in the world and offers those who can hang on to its coattails a high reward in terms of money, kudos and publicity. Where Peter Herbert has failed to make the grade in intelligence he has made up for exposing himself as shameless publicity seeking puffed up ambulance chaser.
I agree with you Cheeky. Except I don’t think what Herbert’s saying is itself racist, can’t see any basis for that claim, just ill-advised, missing the point and very likely simply opportunist headline seeking. None of which will serve to do anything for the cause of getting rid of racism in football or elsewhere.
One might even say,PC gone mad!
mary whitehouse has nothing to do with it she is was just against that smutty benny hill
I love the Yid word attached to Tottenham but I also know the pitfalls.
Once you use something in one way (endearable,humourous etc) then its difficult to apply the law to anyone who is using it negatively and there becomes more grey areas about context.