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.
there is a real issue in all of this but frankly it is cheap publicity, low hanging fruit rather than taking on the much more difficult issues where supporters of other clubs use it to cause hatred. there are plenty of youtube clips of chelsea fans singing about concentration camps and the west ham lot have a few unpleasant songs. but will he take on the chelsea club with its captain who was found to have used racist language but still have him as the captain? nahm, that would be hard work and not likely to reval any benefit/improvement. he will go for the easy target, the ones most likely to stop because they only ever did it as a defensive measure rather than out of hatred, in fact the opposite, out of soildarity. it does all smack unfortunately of cheap publicity rather than demonstarting courage in taking on the diifcult cases. i appreciate what he says re it still being an issue if a jewish person says it. but as he listened to the lyrics of many a rap song that use the n word with impunity and not little contempt. maybe he could focus on that.
I miss Victorian times.
Try the Radio Times instead.
I’ve just tried to get on their site to have a look and it won’t load. Ironically all I’m getting is a white screen.
:lol:
It’s a Love Thy Neighbour media blackout. Or a whitewash.
It’s something.
Or possibly nothing.
Yes.
Probably.
My suspicion is that they have realised the stupidity of Herbert and don’t want to have to scroll through 1,000’s of e-mails pointing out the obvious.
Racism at best is upsetting and at worst down right evil.
We dont have to look too far back in history to see it in its crowning glory in Yugoslavia and Nazi Germany.
What is so extraordinary about the SBL is that very word ‘black’ is encompassed in their organisation’s name. If ever you want to cause divisions in people take a look at them as a living example.
Are our universaties and seats of excellance really exuding people like this nowadays? Incredible.
Couldn’t agree more! As a hater of racism I’ve never quite understood how open segregation can ever help fight racism. How can we take an organisation that openly segrates themselves from other races seriously on racist issues. The way towards beating racism is INCLUSION not exclusion of races! But i’m just an Irish white guy that supports an English football team with a Jewish heritage, what do i know!
It isn’t about excluding people, it’s about representing people. How many black lawyers are there? The answer to that question may hopefully lead you to the answer as to why a black lawyers group may be necessary (not this particular group, just in theory).
I’m of Irish descent myself Astro. Remember that Irish groups and clubs used to be quite common? This wasn’t about division so much as mutual support and community in a time when Irish people were quite commonly discriminated against in England.
I’m not sticking up for this bloke, who in my opinion has already fudged the issue, which will do his cause no good. But I do get tired of hearing the old ‘why can’t we have a white man’s group you racist’ chestnut. Misses the point in a fundamental way imo.
There are thousands of Asian lawyers in this country. Do they count as black ?
If not, will they be forming their own group ?
Have you counted them? Technically, no. Black usually referring to African / Caribbean. They may already have their own group for all we know. Does that idea make you angry?
No need to count them, have worked in the Insurance/ legal profession for 40 years so my comments are based on personal knowledge over that period.
So if you are correct, it sounds as if the Black lawyers society is quite strict regarding who can become a member.
Why would it make me angry ?
I have no idea what kind of membership criteria there is for the black lawyers society. I haven’t looked into it – have you? I would presume that there isn’t any set criteria, but that’s just my assumption.
Why would it make you angry? I really don’t know, but you don’t seem super-keen on the idea, that much is coming across.
Please clarify, on the basis of my comments made at 8.48 and 9.10 how you reach that assumption.
I was simply asking the question.
You appear to be making assumptions about me but I have no idea why, particularly as you know nothing about me.
I’m also asking you questions: does it make you angry? Well, does it? If it doesn’t bother you that an Asian Lawyers Group may exist, or that a black lawyers group does, perhaps you can explain why you are asking in the first place?
But where is your answer to mine at 9.24 ?
And last time I looked, this was a blog where people make all sorts of points and raise all sorts of questions/ issues which is what I have done.
You seem to be jumping to conclusions. I have no idea why you think this issue of Black/ Asian interest groups would make me angry.
I did ask you my question at 9:04 pm and you still haven’t answered it, but I will do you the courtesy you won’t afford me and answer yours.
I didn’t explicitly make any assumption – I asked you if it made you angry. You didn’t yet answer. But If you want to know why I asked, it is, as I already kind of explained, that I don’t see why you would be asking these questions if a ‘black lawyers group’ and a possible ‘asian lawyers group’ were things that didn’t bother or provoke some kind of reaction in you. Perhaps I’m wrong? If so, what is the curiosity?
You asked if the idea made me angry and then stated “you don’t seem super keen on the idea, that much is coming across”.
I asked you to clarify why, based on my comments, you reached that conclusion.
You now seem to be saying the very fact I raised these points must be because it makes me angry.
Sorry but there is no logic to your argument.
People raise all sorts of issues on here all the time is the only reason they do this out of anger ? Clearly not, I cannot understand why anybody ( including me ) would get angry because such groups exist.
Incidentally, there is a group for Asian lawyers in this country. The wonders of google.
Ok David, perhaps I was wrong. I’m still not totally sure what were the roots of your curiosity since you haven’t really explained, but I’ll accept that it wasn’t ‘anger’.
Get a room.
If we didn’t pay attention to race or skin colour, then there would be no racism. Racism is not in the word “YID”, nor is it in the word “BLACK” – it is however, in the mind of a racist and will be even more so, when a society chooses to embrace such words in a negative way, rather than embrace them in a positive way.
If the Society of Black lawyers can embrace the word “BLACK” in a positive way, then why can’t Spurs fans embrace the word “YID” in a positive way?
agreed but you cant get away from the fact that it sends out a subliminal message. Imagine an organisation called the Society of White Lawyers. Christ that would cause it and no doubt some form of investigation by the police.
I think it is because society believes subconsciously in the right of the lowly to raise themselves up the ladder of equality, but not in the right of the already raised to elevate themselves even further ahead.
I actually like the yid connotation at Tottenham.
The problem is when you label like that its easy to twist it around.
Its not a problem when things are ok its a problem when things are not ok.
Obama had a discussion with Jessie Jackson some time around his first election.
Obama was talking about responsibility,Jackson about Civil rights.
It was interesting as we are now moving between the two.
Monorities still need help but they also need to help themselves by building their communities up.
America is the most segregated country I’ve ever been to Ronnie. You only have to look at the split of the Republican / Democrat vote by race and demographic to see how racial inequality is still such a major thing over there.
Its not easy to de-segregate.It will take time.
The areas often both white and black are ignorant of a changing world.
Some of the amendments to the constitutions are held religiously…and ridiculously….as the basis of life in America even though Democracy is the one system that is supposed to be in constant development like a work in progress relative to every other system.
But as Obama said its time for them all to take responsibility. Its a mixture of management top down and for the bottom also to pull themselves up too.
and I was talking about desegregation being important for everyone to develop it.Not just one sided.It should be a partnership Black/white Top/Bottom etc Not just one way
I agree. I think. Anyway, I don’t disagree. :daumen:
I know its a sensitive area.IM torn between the fairness of civil rights and treating everyone the same.You cant do the second until the first is fixed but cant keep on the civil rights thing beyond its usefulness either.
I hope you understand what I mean.
That was Obamas point to Jesse Jackson
@Black Yid. 5.36pm. Well said.
:daumen: :daumen: :daumen: