Fact remains that the claim is that there are sections of the Jewish community who are offended by the chants and this is why the SBL have raised it as an issue.
I agree with that ... hence why I have stated it is a valid discussion to have But your insistence on refusing to address the full issues such as Badiel, such as anti jewish racism thrown at spurs, such as the potential validity of the Society of Black Lawyers is why this discussion is going to go nowhere ... and to be honest it should never have been raised on a banter thread as racism and potential solutions or problems aren't what this thread was to deal with. So on that note I'll bow out so this can go back to being a banter thread ... and before you and I bore the pants off everyone!
Back to the banter I took my daughter as a birthday treat (she's 15 week after next) and you should have seen her face when Loris screwed up... Now THAT would have made you laugh! She just kept saying ...but HOW did they score dad?
Do the spuds really believe they can validate the continued use of the Y word simply by vilifying their accusers or holding up other examples of racism that were not challenged (allegedly)? 2 wrongs do not make a right and attacking the messenger does not, in any way, invalidate the message.
1) no one was vilified in this discussion 2) the examples of racism are not alleged they are factual 3) no messenger was attacked A serious debate should be discussed seriously in a respectful way - I think you failed by starting with the term spuds... This is a serious issue with valid points on both sides... no point scoring is helpful in my opinion
Firstly, do **** off with your silly pretend annoyance at the use of the term 'spud'. 1) Both Herbert & Baddiel have been vilified by spuds during their argument to defend the use of the Y word/s. 2) The 'alleged' refers to whether any of those challenging your use of the Y words ever challenged the other incidences referred to in your (spud's) attempts to make 2 wrongs equal 1 right. 3) As the messengers are Herbert, Baddiel & the SoBL, your claim that they have not been attacked is ludicrous. Finally, I am trying to debate with fellow gooners on a gooner board. Please do not come on here and tell me how or what to post in your own pathetic attempt to score cheap points. Thank you
Kingsley told BBC Sport. Bernie Kingsley is a member of the Tottenham Supporters' Trust board. He knows it causes offence and chooses, rightly, not to use it. I also have sympathy with some of the spud argument, but the first half of Kingsley's comment far outweighs the second half. imo.
There are spuds who think that they should drop the Yiddo word altogether http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ttenham-Hotspur-fans-to-ditch-the-Y-word.html
1) this is a joke thread ... I ain't annoyed by the word Spud...I never complain about it... I was making a point about this being a serious subject worthy of sensible debate and therefore using the word spud was not likely to help a sensible debate ... so no I won't **** off. 2)disagreement doesn't equate to vilification. Badiel has never publicised against Chelsea fans appalling anti semetic tottenham chants or hissing yet does campaign against spurs fans using the term yiddo as a badge of pride. Badiel has also mock tottenham players for "Jewish" mannerisms / looking Jewish (see below) https://www.google.co.uk/url?url=htt...Xjx8uyLwZiIBDQ These things suggest he is a hypocrite. Herbert says that thousands of spurs fans are chanting semetic abuse and have until Nov 30th to stop or he will report them to the Met Police. Spurs fans do not use the Term Yid and Yiddo as abuse - it is used to describe us...it was done because other fans abuse us for our links to the Jewish community and our reputation for being a "Jewish" club... therefore the context in which the word is used matters. Herbert should understand this ... he is the spokesperson for an organisation that could be considered racist for excluding white people IF THE CONTEXT OF THIS IS IGNORED. It may be misguided or divisive to have a separate organisation for black lawyers (aiming to over come the effects of racism)but it would be outragous to equate it as the same as a white only organisation such as the BNP (out to promote race hate). Herbert should understand that Spurs fans appropriated the terms Yid and Yiddo as a defence against the charming "SPURS ARE ON THEIR WAY TO AUSCHWITZ" and the gas chamber noises from many over the past DECADES including your fellow arsenal fans. 3) Disagreeing is a valid part of debate ... NOT ATTACK...if not then surely your disagreement with my point of view is vilification as you have called me pathetic, accused me of making cheap shots and told me to **** off for having the temerity to disagree with you. 4)I am not scoring points cheap or otherwise, I am entitled to be on this board - it is open to anyone to join in which is what I have done ...you may find that pathetic but I don't. This bit is in capitals simply to make it clear that I aint slating any one for disagree with me THIS IS A BANTER THREAD THIS IS A SERIOUS DEBATE WHICH HAS VALID POINTS ON BOTH SIDES THEREFORE IT SHOULD HAPPEN IN A RESPECTFUL MANNER ON A DIFFERENT THREAD.
No .... if it falls on deaf ears it will be because fans of Aresenal, chelsea, west ham, leeds etc. have spent decades abusing spurs fans for being jewish. They come to WHL and hiss, they sang "Spurs are on the to Auschwitz" etc. It has nothing to do with your comment.
1) As the OP, this is my thread. Anyway, who the hell are you to come on our board and try to dictate what we can discuss & where? Get real you pompous fool. 2) That you claim Baddiel and Herbert have not been vilified by your fellow spuds is an outrageous lie. 3) Your 'Baddiel is a hypocrite' mantra is part of your '2 wrongs make a right' fail. By the way, I completely agree that the man is a hypocrite. 4) I found your little whine about the use of the term 'spud' on an Arsenal board pathetic. You offered yourself as some kind holier than thou individual (not for the first time I would add) who had been slighted by the big bad Gooner and I called you on it. Now here's what I suggest you do; Go away and read what your fellow spuds are writing on the forum where you belong, then come back and talk sense about the vilification point and the 2 wrongs = 1 right topics.
so if you don't act like a big bad keyboard warrior your a holier than thou pompous fool? the point of banter is to wind people up and have a laugh the point of a serious debate about serious issues is to learn from people and come to some sort of answer. I aint responsible for others vilifying people, I am responsible for my own words...you came on to this thread and I thought (wrongly as it turns out) that you thought I had vilified them and so I responded accordingly. My point about badiel is that he is not consistent in his views about anti jewish racism when it comes to tottenham and seems to think HE can make fun of of spurs for our jewish roots so he is NOT a good person to use as an example of some one offended by our yiddo chants (as others have been doing). I did not whine about the term spud...i made it clear that i have NEVER commented on it before...i just think that in the middle of a serious debate wind up banter terms unnecessarily muddy waters. I never told you what you can and can not discuss ... I offered an opinion ... disagreeing with you without resorting to insults doesn't make me pompous ... just polite. On the thread on the spurs board I made a comment about PISKIE making himself sound like a twat...I didn't call him one ... just said he was making himself look like one. Some one responded and said there was no need to be abusive. Instead of justifying myself I simply explained what I disagreed with piskie and apologised for referring to him as a twat...it was not hard to do as it is a serious subject and pointless insults (intentional or not) don't get us any closer to an answer. If my explaining myself and trying to be polite makes me holier than thou then I suggest that is not my problem. you present as someone can't debate serious subjects without pointless insults ... I ain't pompous , a fool, I haven't whined and I do make sense. You may disagree with my views and I may be wrong (just as I may disagree with your views and think you are wrong) but leave the keyboard warrior stuff alone ... it don't get us any where
The short reply - what a load of twaddle (except for the bit where you called Peskie a twat). You try to portray yourself as some hard done by martyr, but your self-righteousness is pathetic so I shall simply feel sorry for you and try harder to ignore your whines from here on in.
I think you need to check that again. Also as mentioned, this is meant to be a banter thread, just a bit fun. You can take the serious discussion elsewhere.
I have to say i hold some sympathy with the spuds on this one. I firmly believe that racism is an attitude not a bunch of words. It is all about intent. One of the key problems with moving on from arguments about racism for me, is that people get so easily offended when no offence is meant. For example, the N word was vilified as being aweful (and the way it was used was) and then black people started to use the word for themselves in music, in films and in general speech. For me, this word has got to a point where it should be perfectly acceptable for anyone to say the N word provided it is not being used in a derrogatory way. E.g. if me (white male) and a friend of mine (white male) want to refer to each other as "hey N-", there is absolutely nothing racist about that, it is being used to mean friend or similar. But if i was to go out into the street find myself a black guy and go "i hate you because your a filthy N-" then it is racist due to the intent. In my previous example, if a black person where to overhear me calling my white friend the N word, in my opinion he has no right at all to be offended. In the second example someone overhearign it has every right to be offended.
