Sign in to follow this  
Havana Saint

Disgraceful

Recommended Posts

LG now officially charged by the SFA with racist singing, but yes oldermoresensible pack it was just people on here that fabricated it being racist.

Police enquiry underway, but unfortunately I agree with uphall saint that that doesn't yet mean much in terms of a prosecution

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair HSF, did you even register on the Peterhead forums? It's well known that doing so what have rid the world of racism forever.

Bet you weren't protesting at the Steven Lawrence enquiry or the Washington March in 1963 either? How dare you pretend to find racism disgraceful....

 

lmssaintee - scoring goals = immunity from blame? Careful now...

sorry i did not mean that scoring goals gives immunity from blame

i still think he is a horrible excuse for a human being,but i was just stating the fact that he sores a lot of goals (more own goals off the pitch)

i would doubt that rudi was in the pub, but the east stirling player had to endure the racist scum doing his job

did hsf make any comment on our own forum about the peterhead incident as disgraceful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I find myself perfectly torn between the idea that all racism is equally bad and the idea that directing abuse from a crowd at a 17 y/o is worse than singing about someone in their absence.
Although I'm very tempted to say all is equally bad, to be honest I think there is definitely an extent to which it is just a mantra adopted to simplify the real truth, which is that it is all equally worthy of punishment (although perhaps different sentances).

 

I therefore am partially with lmssaintee on this one, although he loses me with the notion that not posting here about the Peterhead incident makes the outrage about LG not justified, or any similar arguments he may be advancing in that regard.

 

lms - I fully accept you weren't saying goals = immunity, I was being a bit cheeky inferring it from your wording.

Edited by Jiangsu Sainty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a grand read this has been.  Belter of a thread.

 

One thing I just want to ask ( as I have not really followed this story much in the news) did  The Thumb  call/ sing  abou Skatchel being a "Czech refugee" or did he sing/call him  a refugee?? 

 

Forgive my possible  dinosuar tendencies but  is calling someone a "refugee" racist??

 

 

I did look up "refugee" on wiki  and  there is a shed load of  stuff written about definitions etc,

 

 

This   definition of racism is even  longer..

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

 

 

I started reading this but it quickly became overwhellming.

 

 

 Just this once, I am asking this question in all seriousness because I am failing to understand  that the term "refugee" has any racist connection.

 

Hopefully someone with a much better grasp of the law and definitions can set me straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a grand read this has been.  Belter of a thread.

 

One thing I just want to ask ( as I have not really followed this story much in the news) did  The Thumb  call/ sing  abou Skatchel being a "Czech refugee" or did he sing/call him  a refugee?? 

 

Forgive my possible  dinosuar tendencies but  is calling someone a "refugee" racist??

 

 

I did look up "refugee" on wiki  and  there is a shed load of  stuff written about definitions etc,

 

 

This   definition of racism is even  longer..

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

 

 

I started reading this but it quickly became overwhellming.

 

 

 Just this once, I am asking this question in all seriousness because I am failing to understand  that the term "refugee" has any racist connection.

 

Hopefully someone with a much better grasp of the law and definitions can set me straight.

 

In my opinion (and it's just my opinion), it could be construed as racist because it's implying that, because of his nationality/ethnicity, it's OK to assign a stereotype to him and then mock/belittle him for it. It's a stereotype that doesn't make a massive amount of sense because he's not a refugee and he's not from a country where you'd really expect him to be one - but that's often the case with stereotypes.

 

I wouldn't say that calling someone a refugee is, in itself, racist (after all, they could actually be a refugee). But to call someone who is an immigrant a "f**king refugee" and use it as a verbal weapon against them, and chant about it in a pub? That seems pretty racist to me.

 

I noticed further up the thread someone else claiming that if it was a Saints player singing about Dundee nobody would say a word. Well, I really hope that's not the case. I'm pretty confident that if a Saints player stood up in a pub and was racially abusive about a Dundee player, pretty much all of us would think he was out of order. And this is a lesser point but, in the Griffiths case, if I was a Celtic fan I'd also be less than delighted about one of my team's players apparently openly supporting one of my team's rivals.

 

Totally agree with you... belter of a thread.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on bluehaven, very succinctly put, its pretty darn racist. The nationality of the victim is of no importance if the intent is there, not just in a moral sense but also in a criminal one. Ghost I don't really the genuineness of your questions, so loaded was your post, but I'll just about give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

I have an example I can give that is not strictly on a related note, and which I in no way intend to serve as a comparison or declare comparable with the singing of the Skacel song, but has always struck me since my legal studies as a good example of the role which intent can play in the definition of a crime. It is hypothetically (and legally) possible (although immeasurably unlikely) to be convicted of genocide, with the intention of the destruction of, for example "Foreign race X", after killing simply one white scottish person, if your intention was truly to destroy the entirety of that race and you were of the belief that your victim was on that race and that his killing was part accomplishing your goal. The facts that you had only killed one person, or that they were not of the race you intended to remove from the earth would not of themselves prevent a conviction for genocide at the ICC.

 

Similarly, it does not matter whether Czech people are refugees, whether Skacel is a refugee, or even whether Skacel is Czech. In singing that song  the intention is to discriminate against him by virtue of his race/nationality/origin. The term "refugee", as bluehaven said, is clearly loaded with prejudice in this regard, even though it does not make reference to either another nationality or race or whatever. That normally rational people can attempt to rely on pedantry to question this is worrying.

 

Technically, if, secretly and completely unknown to LG, it turned out Skacel was entirely Scottish after all, that would in no way work as a defence for LG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on bluehaven, very succinctly put, its pretty darn racist. The nationality of the victim is of no importance if the intent is there, not just in a moral sense but also in a criminal one. Ghost I don't really the genuineness of your questions, so loaded was your post, but I'll just about give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

I have an example I can give that is not strictly on a related note, and which I in no way intend to serve as a comparison or declare comparable with the singing of the Skacel song, but has always struck me since my legal studies as a good example of the role which intent can play in the definition of a crime. It is hypothetically (and legally) possible (although immeasurably unlikely) to be convicted of genocide, with the intention of the destruction of, for example "Foreign race X", after killing simply one white scottish person, if your intention was truly to destroy the entirety of that race and you were of the belief that your victim was on that race and that his killing was part accomplishing your goal. The facts that you had only killed one person, or that they were not of the race you intended to remove from the earth would not of themselves prevent a conviction for genocide at the ICC.

 

Similarly, it does not matter whether Czech people are refugees, whether Skacel is a refugee, or even whether Skacel is Czech. In singing that song  the intention is to discriminate against him by virtue of his race/nationality/origin. The term "refugee", as bluehaven said, is clearly loaded with prejudice in this regard, even though it does not make reference to either another nationality or race or whatever. That normally rational people can attempt to rely on pedantry to question this is worrying.

 

Technically, if, secretly and completely unknown to LG, it turned out Skacel was entirely Scottish after all, that would in no way work as a defence for LG

 

 

My question was genuine but  but I still don't really have an answer.

 

It's all ifs and buts. Personally, I am leaning towards the term certainly being an insult but not actually being racist in terms of the  what I  think racism is. It would seem at no time is his race, creed, colour etc  mentioned.

 

Will be very interesting to see if he is (a) charged  and (B) convicted..

 

If that does happen then I will indeed have a defintive answer. So it is probably just a wait and see job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be very interesting to see if he is (a) charged  and ( B) convicted..

 

Racism doesn't need to involve another specific race. The term includes discrimination against someone else by virtue of not only their race but also their descent or national or ethnic origin. As bluehaven clearly stated, the intention of the song is to discriminate against Skacel by virtue of his descent, his origin outside our borders.

I can appreciate the source of you not understanding it as "racist" as it doesn't highlight an actual "race", but the UN, whose laws have supremacy and therefore all Member states must follow, has defined it in the broader sense above since at least the 1960s, so I'm not sure your confusion is still really justified.

I'm also not sure how you are still in doubt regarding the transposition of the UN norms into the laws of Scotland, given the conviction of the Dunfermline fan for racist behaviour for the exact same song.

 

As uphall saint and I were discussing a few pages back, there is a possibility he won't be charged, and an even greater possibility he won't be convicted, but if he isn't it will not be because the song isn't racist

 

Edited by Jiangsu Sainty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect this thread to prove Godwins Law before too long.

Actually I have a related theory that as soon as a thread charges someone with racism or fascism or any other such "crime" its effectively the end of the thread.

Edited by babychunder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows??  I am waiting on some of the smarter posters to set me straight. Like you I have no idea??

As a "super/uber" supporter maybe you should refrain from comment on some of these dodgy subjects ? You may be the next target.  

 

Mr ands Mrs St Johnstone got all sorts of threats during their reign.

 

Not many of the Maginficent Seven were still alive at the end of the film if you remember :wink:  

 

Anyway, Good luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question was genuine but  but I still don't really have an answer.

 

It's all ifs and buts. Personally, I am leaning towards the term certainly being an insult but not actually being racist in terms of the  what I  think racism is. It would seem at no time is his race, creed, colour etc  mentioned.

 

Will be very interesting to see if he is (a) charged  and ( B) convicted..

 

If that does happen then I will indeed have a defintive answer. So it is probably just a wait and see job.

 

The chances are you'll never get the sort of definitive answer you're looking for, as so much of what we're talking about is open to individual interpretation. The law could decide to lock LG up and throw away the key, but that still wouldn't mean you'd have to agree.

 

Personally though I struggle with your notion that it's not racist because it doesn't specifically mention his race, colour, etc. Do you really think that's the case? For example, would you say that the fans in Spain and Russia (to use recent examples) who do monkey chants every time a black player touches the ball, are not racist because they don't actually mention race? I reckon most of us would probably agree that that's a pretty clear-cut example of racism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The chances are you'll never get the sort of definitive answer you're looking for, as so much of what we're talking about is open to individual interpretation. The law could decide to lock LG up and throw away the key, but that still wouldn't mean you'd have to agree.

 

Personally though I struggle with your notion that it's not racist because it doesn't specifically mention his race, colour, etc. Do you really think that's the case? For example, would you say that the fans in Spain and Russia (to use recent examples) who do monkey chants every time a black player touches the ball, are not racist because they don't actually mention race? I reckon most of us would probably agree that that's a pretty clear-cut example of racism.

 

 

I think we may have to agree to disagree on the main point. I feel it is very offensive, of that there is NO doubt  ( but then so is calling someone a f*****g c**t) but struggle to think either is racist.  I aint saying it's not though, just that in my opinion it's grey at the very least..

 

 

I am happy to be guided by the  outcome of the case . If he is  convicted then I will accept that the term is indeed racist.

 

At least we have debated this in a civil manner which given what has gone before on this thread is a bonus.

 

Ghostie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The use of the word refugee to me is just as harmful as coagie or mink,racism is on a totally different level. Before my new found friends jump in and want to give me pelters you can **** off i have my opinion you have yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this