IDS is a Spurs fan? I feel uncleansed now... just being remotely associated with that (fill in the blanks) make me sick to my stomach!
How is it we have fans in the government (Iain Duncan Smith), as local MPs (David Lammy) and at the Daily Mail (Richard Littlejohn), yet not one of them has ever stood up for us? Heck, we had Lammy concoct some batshit theory of moving to the White Elephant to sell the club to some Arabs with the sole intention of running West Ham and Leyton Orient out of business, when he could've avoided the whole thing by giving us planning permission.
The police aren't interested. Camaron has endorsed it. The BBC are printing the word "Yid" and not being childish by using "Y-word". Put this to bed for another year.
Disgusting piece of text, probably designed to wind me up: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/tottenham-fans-why-get-rid-of-yid-8820085.html Bzzzzzzz. Did you ask everyone in the ground of their chosen religion on that day? You've also made an assumption about how devoted fans are to Judaism and how strictly they follow the customs. We've all got a Muslim mate who shares a beer with us and doesn't pray five times a day. The logic in this article has angered me more than the recent words from Herbert's mouth. Richard Ferrer is saying that we're the cause of the abuse; it's our fault West Ham and Chelsea sing about the gas chambers. If I was to say: "If we want to get rid of racism, all non-whites should bleach their skin" I'd rightly be locked up.
Also, "Jew" is more commonly referring to them as a race these days. There are many with Jewish ancestory that consider themselves Jewish even if they don't observe any of the religious side of Judaism. He refers to Jews as a race when he's talking about the Jews being racially abused, yet when it suits him he changes to the use of "Jews" to the religious context to demonstrate the fact that no Jewish people could have been at the Lane on Saturday. It's a significant flaw in the grounds of his argument. He also cites Brighton fans as an example of them not trying to claim the word "***got" but what you will find is that in the main they actually do adopt being known as a gay club and chant back "you're too ugly to be gay", etc. I'm not saying it's the same as what we do but there clearly is a similar adoption of their club's reputation that attracts abuse and instead of worrying about whether the majority of the support is gay or not(it isn't) they choose to stand with them in the abuse and see no need to differentiate. The whole premise of their argument comes down to this assumption that if we stopped chanting about being Yids then opposition fans would stop throwing anti-semitic abuse. So what if it doesn't happen? Lets face it, it's not unlikely as the knuckleheads that do it clearly hate us and are happy to use atrocities like the Holocaust in abuse against fans that they know are mostly not Jewish. So what happens? Do the FA and clubs have to crack down on anti-semitic abuse from rival fans? Surely that should be happening anyway so shouldn't the authorities inability to take action against it be the focus of their anger? And if us stopping the chants doesn't work then what next? Should we start banning anyone that looks a bit "Jewy" from going to our matches, because lets face it we don't want to do anything that might provoke the racists into being racist.* If they do want us to stop using the chants, surely the best way to get that done is to have a proper, open discussion with our fans about it. I say it's the best way because it's not just in the stadium the songs are sung. If they go in heavy handed giving the club fines and threatening points deductions then they're only going to stop it in the stands, we'll still be singing in the pubs and around the ground as the police have no issue with it. If anything the chants will increase outside like we saw inside the ground last weekend when we knew the police wouldn't stop us. Also if all these Jewish people speaking out found it so offensive then why has it only been in very recent years they've started to complain about? My guess is that many of them didn't know about it, infact some have admitted as much. So they feel free to pass judgement on it without fully understanding the history behind it, the same thing that non-Jewish Spurs fans are being accused of doing by the same people. They show it any every article they write too. The situation is that, rightly or wrongly, for decades the Spurs fans use chants involving the word "Yid" or a variation and for decades there has been no criticism from anyone for it and no action by the police or FA against it. The Jewish people that are now opposing it might think it's obviously very wrong but they've also got to accept that the vast majority of people who mattered for the vast majority of the time we've been using the chants have had no problem with it. That doesn't mean it can't change or shouldn't change but it undoubtedly complicates and confuses matters. Even since the issue has been brought up, the police have said they have no problem with it and even the PM doesn't have a problem with it. So why on Earth do they depict us as blindly flying in the face of the problem(as they see it) which is so obvious yet apparently so many others, people that matter at that, clearly feel the same way as our fans. Even the FA statement was weak, it chose to remind us that the chanting could lead to criminal charges, something the police themselves refute. If the FA were threatening their own charges then fine, our fans might've taken notice but when it comes to statements about the law we're more likely to believe the police than the FA. *I read this on Boy Hostpurs' blog, I thought it was quite a good point though.
The club are being set up. And the haters have shown themselves to be unwilling to tolerate or acknowledge ANY reason why the word was and is used.
That Independent article is bizarre, could almost merit a place in the "disgraceful journalism" thread. I am still interested to know who is being offended. The only people who could possibly claim offence is Jewish Spurs supporters, and there is no evidence that any are. I suspect that if there is any complaints from the Jewish community it is from people commenting on the word out of any context, and may not even have known about the chanting until asked.
Peter Herbert, that herbert from the Association of Black Lawyers argues that there are some people in the ground who will be offended by the term "Yid" being used and therefore the law is being broken by the chanting. According to him that is the end of the matter because it is the responsibility of the club and the police to uphold the law. No ifs, buts or maybes. This is of course patent nonsense. Unless the club does receive complaints, you can't assume anyone will be offended. Secondly, for the term to be considered racially or religiously abusive, those using it would have to be shown to demonstrate hostility towards another person or group based on their race or religion. This is far removed from the self deprecating chanting of Spurs fans. The irony of course is that the chanting is more likely to reduce the risk of racially or religiously aggravated offence being committed at Spurs' matches. When the message is clearly sent out to opposition fans that such terms are not going to cause offence, they are less likely to want to use them.
His use of Brighton highlights the fact that it doesn't matter what you call yourself, as others will call you what they want to call you. Totally undermines his own argument, as does Chelsea abusing one of their managers and one of their players for being Jewish. Was that our fault, too? Mentioning a Huddersfield fan giving a Nazi salute in a match against Leeds also seems to have failed to spark any sort of realisation that he's talking bollocks. What a moron. Horrible victim blaming ****e. Nice to note that a Jewish Spurs fans has corrected him on his assumptions about Yom Kippur in the comments, too. As has been noted, you can be Jewish and non-religious. David Baddiel is, ironically. On the subject of Baddiel, I found it interesting to note that he wrote The Infidel, a comedy about a Muslim who finds out that he's adopted and is of Jewish descent. He foreshadows this event by... well, just look at the top that he's wearing early on in the trailer: [video=youtube;qQnySDKL4ag]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQnySDKL4ag[/video] Omid Djalili, the lead actor in the film, is also a Chelsea fan.
Just started reading the comments. This one's quality "'Gaza' played for Tottenham Hotspur. Such impartiality on the part of Spurs should be noted!"
That's a shocking piece of journalism. lazy, ill informed, full of ridiculous assumptions and completely sensationalist. I'm not entirely sure his views are representative of the Jewish community. Certainly the Jewish friends i've discussed this with think it's absoultely ridulous and although some are Spurs between them they support a range of teams including Watford, Arsenal and QPR!
Good debate guys and I am with you all the way. Just to lighten the topic a little, we in Wales have adopted a similar defence mechanism as you will hear on Sunday should Cardiff take the lead. For years fans of English clubs have taunted us for our apparent carnal desires for sheep (and we will probably see some plastic, blow up sheep thrown around the away end on Sunday) - totally untrue I can assure you. But as a result Cardiff fans use the chants "Sheep sha££ers" and when Cardiff take the lead "One nil to the Sheep sha££ers". Taking the arguments of Herbert and Baddiel to their illogical conclusions should Cardiff fans be told not to use these chants as they are offensive to sheep or vegetarians?
I just checked Richard Ferrer's Twitter feed online and the top post is this: "I am Jewish & a Spurs supporter. And I wonder if @richferrer was absent from school the day the word CONTEXT was taught?" Why has he retweeted that, unless he already knew he was wrong and wrote that article to get a bit of money and attention? Strange man.
Thick man There is not enough intelligence in this country, hence people like him end up influencing other sheep.
Did he actually bother to ask anyone before he came to the conclusion he'd reached long in advance? There's only one chant to drive the point home - just change the k to a y... [video=youtube_share;2GQMIXGRjaw]http://youtu.be/2GQMIXGRjaw[/video]
It's a tricky subject. What I don't like about the 'Yid Army' stuff is that it portrays us as a Jewish club, or can be seen to do so. We're definitely not, the vast majority of our support, especially our total global support is not Jewish. For me as a white English atheist, we are first and foremost an English club, but with massively strong British connections going right back to our early days. I think Sandy Brown had Scottish connections and Cameron sounds Scottish, and probably our greatest ever player was Scottish, Iron Man Mackay. Then there's Blanchflower, Burgess, Jones, Bale, White, Spurs Immortals. We of course now have and have had many foreign players and fans, from all over the world, different colours, different faiths, etc. To pigeon-hole us as Jewish is just so wrong. If Spurs fans want to sing 'Yid Army' you won't catch me criticising them. I just wouldn't sing along, but as I don't go to games anymore that's pretty much a moot point. For the record whiilst watching at home, I sing along quite often but not with the 'Y' songs or 'stand up if you hate Arsenal'. **** me I'm normally sat on the sofa with a beer, and I ain't moving ma fat ass no way man
That's been said for a few years now and I still struggle to get my head around it. Is it really my issue? Do I need to change my view about the race being "Middle eastern"? I've done a little reading, and I'm even more confused. There's "race" as in the human race and there's "race" as in black, white, Asian (*******, Caucasian, *****lian). None of these terms are recognised in the modern age; it's all about "ethnic groups". And then there's "race" as in social and cultural, which is probably where the arguments are based. Like I said, the more I dig into Jews being a race, the more confused I get. Me being anti-religion probably doesn't help my thinking. The shallow association some people have with their religious group troubles me too - either you believe in your god or you don't. I cannot call myself Christian and in the next breath say I don't believe in Jesus, our Lord and the holy spirit. Arrrrgh. There's a huge difference in language. Names and terms should be properly defined. English is too flexible. It was much easier when the British defined everyone else as foreigners.
You can be ethnically Jewish in a similar way to being ethnically Polish or something, in my experience. It's about upbringing, background and culture. I'm sure that many Londoners can relate to that. Someone whose family is Italian probably has a lot of Catholic influences on their life, regardless of their faith. I see it in a similar manner.
You have coarse genetic groupings, and then cultural groupings (based on religion, nation, politics) . Neither one implies a latent leaning to the other.
