You may see the relevance of this photograph of Muslims making the Quenelle gesture when you listen to this broadcast about the decisive battle against Muslim invaders into Europe…
The Battle of Tours (Poitiers)
Melvyn Bragg and his guests discuss the Battle of Tours. In 732 a large Arab army invaded Gaul from northern Spain, and travelled as far north as Poitiers. There they were defeated by Charles Martel, whose Frankish and Burgundian forces repelled the invaders. The result confirmed the regional supremacy of Charles, who went on to establish a strong Frankish dynasty. The Battle of Tours was the last major incursion of Muslim armies into northern Europe; some historians, including Edward Gibbon, have seen it as the decisive moment that determined that the continent would remain Christian.
Listening to 5Live I caught this look at Zoopla (17 mins) ending its sponsorship of West Brom because Anelka made what is an anti-Semitic gesture.
We heard that the owner of Zoopla was Jewish…but no indication of Anelka’s religion.
Anelka was quoted as saying this was an anti-‘system’ gesture not anti-religion….strange choice of word there by Anelka.
Lucy Grey, the BBC presenter, then asked ‘Is this Opportunistic of Zoopla?‘….Suggesting perhaps they weren’t really offended…that there was nothing to be offended about?
The equivocation, scepticism and lack of depth as to the nature of the Quenelle made me have another look at the subject…..
The BBC were slow to realise the significance of Zoopla’s move, reported 4 days ago but barely noticed by the BBC.
That seems to have changed today as it is given a prominent place on the Frontpage:
The BBC however still have problems with deciding whether the ‘Quenelle’ is anti-Semitic or merely an ‘up you‘ to government. (Wonder how they would take it if it was a Tea Party member who made a similar salute?…the BBC’s disdain for white, anti-government Americans being well known).
Sky has no such problem:
The Truth Behind Footballer’s ‘Sick’ Salute
Nicolas Anelka may or may not have known what he was doing with his Nazi-like salute, but his great friend, the French comedian Dieudonne M’bala M’bala, almost certainly does.
Dieudonne is smart. Very smart. He’s smart enough to invert an idea, and invent a gesture, and direct them towards the same place – modern anti-Semitism.
Newsnight had a look at this with its now infamously coy description of the Neo-Nazi Alain Soral as merely a ‘writer and film-maker’ and a close friend of Dieudonne. Paxman does says twice that the gesture is anti-Semitic but allows Soral to get away with several references to the ‘Zionist lobby’…or the ‘System’…Paxman should have been asking exactly what he meant by that as it was clear it was being used as a euphemism for Jewish….the ‘System’ also a euphemism…as Dieudonne claims the ‘System’ is being run by Jews. Soral himself says ‘That’s the question’….except Paxman doesn’t take him up on that.
We are told supporters of Dieudonne say if there are no disturbances at Dieudonne’s shows, and there hasn’t been we are reassured by the BBC, then what is the problem?…even if it was anti-Semitic?
The problem might be that it is not only people in the theatre that see these performances…Newsnight itself admits that You Tube broadcasts of the shows get 2 million hits a week….just how many of those viewers then become ‘poisoned’ (using Sarah Montague’s description of the supposed effect of the EDL’s own statements) and then go on to act out their prejudices for real?
And what of Soral? He is a well known Neo-Nazi….Newsnight even flashed this picture of him making the Quenelle salute at the Holocaust memorial up on the screen:
And yet Paxman made no link to that during the interview.
The BBC, Paxman aside, do seem reluctant to come out and say outright that the Quenelle is an anti-Semitic gesture….or that it is associated with some Muslims…the BBC preferring to link it to the Far Right and in this report allows Dieudonne to get away with using ‘Zionist’ rather than Jew or anti-semitic.
‘It is the trademark of the hugely controversial French comedian Dieudonne M’Bala M’Bala, who once said he would like to put a quenelle – a rugby-ball-shaped serving of fish or meat paste – up the backside of Zionists.
Dieudonne made the gesture when he headed his own anti-Zionist campaign in the European elections in 2009. French media trace it further back, to one of his performances in 2005. It came to greater prominence in September when two soldiers were photographed appearing to make the gesture outside a Paris synagogue.
There are thousands of examples posted online, some at sensitive sites such as the Auschwitz death camp, and Dieudonne’s fans can be seen repeating it outside his theatre.
Both Anelka and Dieudonne say it is an anti-establishment symbol of defiance. But the French sports minister, Valerie Fourneyron, was one of many to disagree with the footballer’s interpretation, saying it was sickening and incited racial hatred.’
We were told in one interview with an ‘expert’ that it was the ‘Far Right, radical Muslims and youths from the Banlieues’ who are following Dieudonne in big numbers….so that’ll be the Far Right, radical Muslims and lots of other Muslims from the Muslim Banlieues then.
Just what are the BBC hiding with this constant refusal to admit ‘normal’ Muslims are making the gesture…such as Anelka?
Here Anelka Tweets his excuse:
Another ‘supporter’ of Dieudonne doing the Quenelle outside the Jewish school in Toulouse where a Muslim killed some of the pupils.
But Anelka is a good friend of Dieudonne….and here he is once again making the salute…this time in a theatre, so presumably he is there to see the show……he must be under no illusions exactly what Dieudonne means…..
This is a screenshot of Dieudonne from his film L’Antisémite.……
Guess who the ‘them’ might be…….
“L’Antisémite,” directed by and starring the French comedian Dieudonné, was, according to Le Monde, co-produced by Iran:
After images that hold Auschwitz up for derision, we see the shoot of a film centered on an alcoholic and violent character who is disguised as a Nazi officer for a costume party. The Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson appears as himself for a few minutes, the Shoah is personified as a saint.
Here’s the trailer. In voice-over, a woman says:
Tell me you’re not an anti-Semite. My love, it’s a sickness. You have to be truly cured. For the children. Anti-Semitism is the worst thing that could happen to them.
Then, on camera, Dieudonné says:
You’re right, my dear. I’m an anti-Semite. It’s clear the Jews control everything—the media, finance, politics. We no longer have a choice. We must—
and he turns to camera and, staring into it, says—
exterminate them.
Now you might be thinking that he’s just acting, those words or sentiments are merely what’s in the script…..but have a look at this Press TV interview Dieudonne has done…..once he gets onto the ‘Zionist Lobby’…you will soon note the exact same sentiments towards them as on the film as a whole…..
He says…...I will be happy to celebrate the destruction of Israel…the Jews are the greatest Mafia in the history of mankind….we should always fight against those who do bad in the world…and those who created the State of Israel.
So is the Quenelle just ‘anti-System‘?
To Dieudonne the ‘System’ is the Jews, the Zionist Lobby which ‘runs the world’…..so anti-system is merely an evasive subterfuge for saying anti-Semitic.
What is the quenelle gesture?
Jean-Yves Camus, a French academic who studies the extreme right, told the Independent the quenelle has become a “badge of identity, especially among the young, but it is doubtful that all of them understand its true meaning”. He says Dieudonne has become the hero of a movement convinced the world is run by Washington and Tel Aviv.
Note no mention of Muslims.
Can you accidentally do a Nazi salute?
A 20-year-old Greek footballer has been banned for life from playing for his national team after a controversial goal celebration in which he appeared to give a Nazi salute. The player says he hadn’t understood the meaning of the gesture – but is it possible, in 2013, for a European to be so poorly informed?
Many parties on the fringes of European politics employ elements of neo-Nazi symbolism, he says, although they present it as something else to stay on the right side of the law.
In particular, those groups have managed to infiltrate sport in countries such as Germany, Austria, Italy and the UK.
“Football culture is symbolically rich and neo-Nazi-type gestures and symbols have become immersed in certain of those cultures… It’s obvious what they represent.”
In 2005, the then Lazio striker Paolo Di Canio received a one-game ban for a raised-arm salute.
Contesting the ban, he described himself as a “fascist” but “not a racist”.
“I made the Roman salute because it’s a salute from a comrade to his comrades and was meant for my people,” he said.
Matthew Goodwin, associate professor of politics at the University of Nottingham, and a specialist in political extremism, thinks that it is inconceivable that young Europeans could be entirely ignorant of the associations of neo-Nazi symbolism.
“Europe still displays a fascination with Nazi Germany – its paraphernalia and culture is still very heavily present. There is the popular culture, the films – the symbolism is still represented,” he says.
In Greece, in particular, it is “incredibly doubtful” that people don’t have notion of what the symbolism or gestures mean, says Goodwin – partly because of all the fuss over Golden Dawn.
“It’s not a marginal issue,” he says.
“Naivete and ignorance is difficult to digest in modern Greece.”
Once again the BBC refers solely to the ‘Far Right’.
Of course Muslims would never think of doing such a salute….and if they did, the BBC would never report it…….
Hezbollah and the Mullahs of Iran.
Hamas reaching for the TV remote.
“The Hamas credo is not just anti-Israel, but profoundly anti-Semitic with racism at its core. The Hamas Charter reads like a modern-day ‘Mein Kampf.'”
"Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it
as it had eliminated its predecessors."
The Imam and Martyr Hassan al-Banna
[Al-Banna has had a huge influence on Islamic thought.
He is the grandfather of Tariq Ramadan and older brother of Gamal Al-Banna.]
The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it.
Nothing is loftier or deeper in Nationalism than waging Jihad against the enemy and confronting him when he sets foot on the land of the Muslims. And this becomes an individual duty binding on every Muslim man and woman; a woman must go out and fight the enemy even without her husband’s authorization, and a slave without his masters’ permission.
Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
I swear by that who holds in His Hands the Soul of Muhammad! I indeed wish to go to war for the sake of Allah! I will assault and kill, assault and kill, assault and kill
From Harry’s Place….just so we know what’s what and who supports who….
Labour and Hamas UK
The BBC go on to tell us that…..
Anelka is not the first French footballer playing in England to make the gesture. Samir Nasri and Mamadou Sakho were also photographed in this way, although Sakho later tweeted that he had been tricked and didn’t realise its true meaning.
‘French footballers’?
Anelka is a Muslim, Sakho is a Muslim, Nasri is also Muslim…why no mention….not relevant?
Mamadou Sakho (L), Tony Parker (C), and Samir Nasri (R). Photos: Screengrab/Slate/Youtube/DieuPharaon/AstuceFoot
The Quenelle is clearly intended by Dieudonne to be an anti-Semitic salute…the evidence is just too overwhelming to say otherwise….pity the BBC doesn’t seem too keen to look hard into this and seems more concerned to deflect people off into looking at the ‘Far Right’ whilst failing to mention that three footballers who made the gesture are all Muslim.
The BBC fails in its obligations to inform us and bring us the News…instead bringing us a version of the news that bares only a passing resemblance to the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Hiding the fact that some Muslims maybe anti-Semitic is an insult to everyone…..the BBC were quick to report the exaggerated claims of the Muslim pressure group ‘Tell Mama’ about alleged incidents of anti-Muslim attacks but seems all too keen to sweep under the carpet incidents of anti-Semitism, all too willing to ascribe it to some other intention or to blame some other convenient scapegoats.
Andrew Gilligan in the Telegraph tells us the truth about ‘Tell Mama’…and about the BBC…
“Over the past week or so, these sorts of hate crimes have noticeably increased in number and, in many instances, become more extreme.
“The scale of the backlash is astounding … there has been a massive spike in anti-Muslim prejudice. A sense of endemic fear has gripped Muslim communities.”
The media, especially the BBC, have accepted the claims without question. A presenter on Radio 4’s influential Today programme stated that attacks on Muslims were now “on a very serious scale”.
Yet the unending “cycle of violence” against Muslims, the unprecedented “wave of attacks” against them from strangers in the street, the “underlying Islamophobia in our society” – all turn out to be yet more things we thought we knew about Woolwich that are not really supported by the evidence.
Always leave ’em laughing~
Obama and the two star performers were in fact posing for a picture doing the well-known “brush off the shoulders” hip-hop move at a NYC fundraiser, which has no connection to the quenelle.
“Lucy Grey, the BBC presenter, then asked ‘Is this Opportunistic of Zoopla?‘….”
—
The entire BBC ‘news’ estate seems littered with this idiotic question technique. It’s straight out of those gadget mags where they can’t make a definitive claim, and hence try and make one anyway in guise of a question.
Beyond the knots the BBC and its fellow travelers tie themselves in on gestures and inferences, etc, which can easily fill the 24/7 news maw with endless speculation and procrastination, this one seems pretty simple and straightforward; Zoopla can surely do what the heck they like. Their money to spend how they choose. Unless of course there is now some compulsion to keep funding stuff even if it is contrary to one’s beliefs and interests.
Which of course may still appeal to the mindset of such as Ms. Grey.
The simple fact that the BBC protects the religion of Anelka, is all that is needed, it is glaringly obvious.
Downplaying the facts – omitting the reason.
As you have shown, there are multitude photos and film
of Muslims acting vehemently anti-Semitic, fascism lovers (as is shown by Mein Kampf s popularity), Nazi salutes etc … it is rabid hatred, it comes from this so called … religion …. and, that is it people.
This very morning the bbc states on radio, that there is a man, a suspect, who was desperate to blow himself up if he could massacre as many innocents as possible, this … man, the bbc envisage s ahem!
“has been encouraged to engage in activity related to terrorism” read – a muslim, a muslim fascist, who wants to mass murder as many non muslims as possible.
“encouraged” by his ……. wife? … hmm
who encouraged her? – the hate manual, – the mosque? – the imam? – the erm “god”?
Zoopla can indeed not do what it likes. It will have no doubt signed a legal contract with WBA and will take a hit if it breaks it. Unless there are extenuating circumstances which allow them to withdraw – like a racist player?
And why would they ditch a Premiership sponsor deal unless they are seriously pissed off?
Seems like the BBC are playing both ends against each other and all against the Jews. As usual.
It is my understanding that the deal was due to run out in the summer and they have said that they will not be renewing it (i.e. they are not reneging on the deal).
Just a note – holding the hand across the chest with the fingers together and the thumb extended is the Masonic symbol for ‘fidelity’ whilst with the thumb hidden is the symbol for ‘reverence’.
These actions predate National Socialism by about 200 years.
Different organisations put different symbology to similar actions – as no doubt Robert Langdon would testify.
Arther,
Its all to do with context, I have no doubt that others do likewise, the fact remains I don’t think they go around stutting there stuff around Jewish establisments.
Here’s an example of masonic fraternity.
(Note that this is from the UGLE – United Grand Lodge of England)
“Sharia in action in the UK: Man arrested for ripping up pages of Qur’an at soccer match”
By Robert Spencer.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/01/sharia-in-action-in-the-uk-man-arrested-for-ripping-up-pages-of-quran-at-soccer-match/
France, 10 October, year 732-
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/17507
Brilliant-thanks for posting George R.
If you heard “In Our Time” last week, you`ll actually hear a “Rehistorian” from the Padded Seminar Room of SOAS.
Some sheikh pays him to dance for Iran and for “Palestine” in something called the London Middle East Institute…whose Oyster cards probably don`t go as far as Whitechapel and points east like Mile End.
As for Bede or Gibbon…hardly Ralph Miliband or Edward Said now are they?
here we go again, BBC and some shill spouting dubious pap, about
THE prophet Mohamhead,
(whose prophet? – a prophet?? – did this person referred to, even exist???),
droning on about THE revelation???
patently absurd, factually incorrect, deliberate in its propaganda.
sorry folks … off switch time..
Noggin, the BBC has an official policy to refer to “The Prophet” Mohammed. It’s intellectually dishonest, and they’re forced to have it out of fear and deference, but they do have an official policy, even though they claim it’s merely a “recommendation”:
Yes, that Stephen Mitchell. He’s recently retired on full, gold-plated pension (although apparently he didn’t get one of those fat payoffs on top of it), after being allowed to stay on for an additional six months.
In any case, if they all follow the “recommendation” every time, it’s a de facto policy.
That will be “prophet” as in “the Prophet Jimmy Savile” I take it?
Five Live have been deafening in their silence on this topic. You might believe, with some confidence, that the impending withdrawal of a Premier League sponsor on certain other race hate grounds would be a day long lead story. Not this one.
Only this morning, with an FA charge an hour or so away have they mentioned it other than in very faint passing.
Rachel Burden circa 8 to 8.30am mentioned it during a news bulletin with a very pronounced emphasis on the word “some” as: “Some people think it is anti-semitic.” Five Live seem not to care if it is. It suffer’s from the leftist disease of Jewphobia.
Five Live’s continued bias should be investigated as a matter of urgency, starting with Campbell, Bacon and Nolan. You couldn’t even call their bias liberal. It is often far to the left, and of the worst smug, sneering kind.
The reason it has not been thus far is those who should be doing so either agree with its stance or have radio dials which rarely visit anything other than Radio 3, Radio 4, or Classic FM.
Is it “opportunistic” to bury a Balen Report or to prevent an expose of Savile being broadcast by the host employing agency?
The BBC would just love to hear your views on it…not!
Great research and utterly unarguable Alan.
Forgive me though, if I just accept he`s a halal sheep who wants to impress his new pal and that faith he now embraces? And being anti-Semitic is core to their politics and actions?
It`s the craven media who are more in the frame…the likes of this “French comic” and Russell Brand are well-paid licensed shits…that`s why the BBC etc love them so.
The Great God Football is being shown up for what it is…maybe we should get it banned now on the telly for inciting racial hatred…I make no apology, if I prevent only one would-be bigot from…etc, etc.
And final point-this “dedication of the goal”…it was shit…Ibrahimovich could dedicate his masterpiece even to Nike if he likes…but the way these squittish prancing weirdos “dedicate goals, dives, cards” etc to whoever…makes me sick.
Hardly Keats, Dickens, Michaelangelo is it?…yet we indulge the tossers, and engage with it all without laughing!
Good old EU eh…the Premier League is now spreading hate crimes and offence(both real and fake) across the globe now.
Time to cut it out-jumpers for goalposts eh?
5 Live’s position on the quenelle is still one of doubt, typically using the phrase ‘which some say is an anti-Semitic gesture’.
Some say they’d like 5 Live to explain why Dieudonne’s fanboys take such pleasure in photographing themselves making this gesture at anywhere with Jewish connections, even at Holocaust memorials.
Derbyshire has just done five minutes on it. To me she sounded rather disinterested, but she often does anyway, so that might be a little unfair.
My suspicion is that politically inconvenient stories such as this one are wilfully ignored by Five Live in the hope they might just go away. Only when they don’t do they receive grudging coverage.
On the BBC website sports pages, ‘some’ becomes ‘many’.
However, many view it as an anti-Semitic gesture, reminiscent of the Nazi salute
The ‘some’ or the ‘many’ of course includes the FA, who have charged Anelka with
“an aggravated breach in that it included a reference to ethnic origin and/or race and/or religion or belief”.
And it includes the French government
The 47-year-old performer, a friend of Anelka’s, makes the sign during his shows, angering the French government, which has tried to ban him from using it.
But 5 Live ploughs on with its ‘some say’.
Radio 4 News tonight well into ‘some say’ mode re those who view the gesture as anti-Semitic. I am growing more and more uneasy about how this is being reported and it is linked to ‘some say’. It is the tone of voice thing complete with the ‘some say’ and it is because the beeboids obviously just don’t think it that important and that it doesn’t really matter whether it is anti-Semitic or not.
Disinterested would be good. But I suspect that you mean uninterested. Which is the normal bbc attitude when faced with something that goes against their biased and bigotted policies.
Any criticism of the gesture and the attitude behind it comes across as being tantamount to defending Israel, which is a cardinal sin at the BBC. Just ask Paul Mason or Roland Hughes. Additionally, that peculiarly twisted combination of fear and blind fealty to political correctness makes them less likely to be critical anyway. This timidity seems to have tied Paxman’s hands as well. He probably shrugged it off and blamed the “biddable” types and not himself.
Most of them really have no desire to get into trying to prove that most Mohammedans do not see Israel and all Jews everywhere as their mortal enemies, as they know all too well that would be folly. Most BBC journalists and on-air talent and producers agree with the majority Muslim view that Israel and the Jewish/Zionist Lobby are the real problem in the Middle East, as well as in US/UK involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan (when they’re not in the “No War For Oil” mode, anyway), and so we get this dithering and intellectually lazy approach.
Aside from all that, I hope everyone remembers to hold the BBC’s coverage of this issue as evidence against anyone who says the BBC is controlled by Zionists. No organization under such influence would behave like this.
Shelagh Fogarty had a French sports journalist on who explained that yes, this is an anti-Semitic gesture, but only became widely known as such a couple of days before Anelka made it.
The story was dropped from the 2.00pm news bulletin but remained in the sports bulletin, which referred to Anelka’s ‘controversial gesture’.
Beautifully written David
Have to agree with Alan here, It is strange how the bBC can point out the faith of the owners of Zoopler, yet leave out the faith of the nasty peice of work which is Anelka.
What is about Islam which the bBC fall overthemselves over:
Is it how they casue friction agaisnt Non-muslims
Could it be how they treat Women,Gays,Apostates, non Believers?
Could it be how they love to utter ‘Allah Ackba’ as they murder their next innocent victim.
Could it be how they protray themselves as only victims
There will come a day when the British public will say enough is enough, and on that day I hope to allah that each and every bBC worker goes the way of the Dodo
“Dutch soccer team ditches Israeli player for Abu Dhabi match”
http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-News/Dutch-soccer-team-ditches-Israeli-player-for-Abu-Dhabi-match-337230
Invent a sign that is Anti-Islamic and see where that gets you and how many years it gets you as well.
I thought it was as follows:- Thumb on first finger making shape of an O then vigorously move hand up and down repeatedly.
The BBC mindset = the Stockholme syndrome?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome
From the Wiki Stockholm Syndrome page (link above)
“When a victim believes the same values as the aggressor, they cease to be a threat”
How dare anyone imply Barack Obama was doing the “quenelle”!
He won’t even do the Pledge of Allegiance (hand over heart) for fear someone might take it the wrong way! He’s unusually sensitive to symbolism! Notice two Lefties, Bill Richardson and Hillary Clinton, having no problem with doing it, however:
Considering his Rottweiler reputation, isn’t it amazing how Paxman can suddenly turn lapdog when it suits a BBC agenda.
They discussed this story on Today this morning as well. Curiously, the segment did not deserve a featured clip, as the producers felt it wasn’t as important as the situation in Afghanistan which was worth two.
Before the segment, in the middle of the sports interlude, we heard from a football finance expert who suggested that Zoopla’s decision was most likely driven by greed for money (I paraphrase slightly). It seems they could have gotten a better deal by renegotiating fresh next year anyway. More importantly, apparently they have a stock exchange deal coming up, and didn’t want to damage that by being remotely associated with something controversial. Oh, those Jews and their lust for money before principle, eh?
Then, @7:40, we got to discussion in advance of the FA’s decision with a BBC Sports reporter, a Jewish writer who is “a passionate Leeds supporter” (Rhys Hughes, call your office), and a rep from West Brom. The sports Beeboid at least mentioned that anti-racism groups in addition to Jews considered the gesture to be offensive. The FA must appear to be coming down hard on racism in football.
The minimum penalty on Anelka would be a five-game suspension, and Humphrys pointed out that as these players are generally immensely wealthy, the loss of a few games’ pay is seen by most people as just a slap on the wrist.
Then we turned to the Jewish writer. In a recent book, he apparently opined that there really wasn’t a problem with anti-Semitism in Britain, and Humphrys asked if he had since changed his mind. The writer didn’t answer that question, and instead said it was easy for people to find out what the gesture really meant and it was obviously an anti-Jew thing. The West Brom rep said he had no idea what it meant at the time. Humphrys supported him by saying (I believe rather dishonestly) that only “a certain group of people” knew its true meaning. Fair enough on one level, I suppose, as the guy seemed sincere about that, and said that it was obviously an anti-Semitic gesture and “we don’t want to import” anti-Semitism and Jew-baiting into Britain.
However – and this is why I question Humphrys’ attempt to sanitize – the writer pointed out that everyone in France already knew, and the match was televised there, so it wasn’t really the cryptic enigma Humphrys tried to suggest it was.
PS: In spite of the officially published running order, the Thought For the Day immediately followed the segment on Anelka. We were told that, just as Nicky Campbell scolded – yes, it was scolding – a black Christian female minister on a recent Big Questions, Christian theology had evolved over the centuries beyond the old positions (Campbell didn’t equally scold the Mohammedan females who defended wearing the niqab, and in fact deliberately squashed an attempt to get at why they felt their religious belief directed them to wear it). The Right-on Reverend Graham James was directing this at people who claimed a vengeful God was causing the recent floods as punishment for Parliament’s vote on homosexual marriage. He said there’s no evidence God does this sort of thing.
I wonder if the BBC would allow on somebody with the point of view that, while God may not be punishing Britain over that vote, perhaps it wasn’t wrong for people to believe that homosexual marriage wasn’t consistent with Christian theology.
i think that the message must be sent out clearlyto the so called ethnic minority communitys meaning the muslim community for short that anti semetism and racism wont be tolerated at the workplace or any other institutiions in society,a football pitch fits into these categorys,anti semetism has been on the rise in europe and in the uk at a alarming rate in the last few years,far right muslims groups are behind alot of this anti semetism and racism,also alot of labout mps dont help matters with there support for anti semetic groups who whip up hatred against the state of isreal,those who are found out to be peddling this hatred and trying to divide soceity by turning communitys against each other must be dealt in a robust and firm manner by the police and the goverment,anelkas anti semetism is just a symtom of a bigger evil that blights are communitys and this must be tackled now without fear of upsetting the muslim community.
Nobody would have heard of this gesture if somebody had not made a fuss ,now we will see it over and over
And if people are charge doing it, (Like they do for racist tweets) then they will understand that racism isn’t acceptable. Or is it acceptable to hate Jews?
I think it’s more a case of it’s acceptable to hate Israel while pretending it’s not associated with all Jews everywhere.
There is a simple rule about when the salute is anti-semitic or anti-zionist. If the salute is made in front of something symbolising Israeli power (e.g. embassy) then it is anti-Zionist. If it the salute is in front of something associated with ordinary, everyday Jews, then it is clearly attacking the Jewish people and is anti-semitic. In Anelka’s case it was not in front of something symbolising Israeli power therefore it can only be interpreted as being anti-semitic.
He did it as a sign of solidarity with someone whose career and life is essentially dedicated to anti-Semitism. It wasn’t exactly the equivalent of “Hi, Mom!” or “Shout out to my peeps”. He did it in public, knowing it was broadcast live. Humphrys tried to pretend we couldn’t know what Anelka was thinking on that score, but it’s a pretty pointless gesture if he didn’t think Dieudummy was watching or wouldn’t see the video clip.
After he carried out his NAZIS salute he said:
This is a special salute to my friend Dieudonne M’bala M’bala
Imagine the outcry if somebody made a hanging motion after scoring a goal and then said,
I did it for my mate in the KKK.
Yeah right.
Check out the comments in this Telegraph news brief about the FA charging Anelka with making a racist gesture. Lots of anger at the all-powerful Jewish Lobby. And the BBC wants to pretend that there’s no issue of rising anti-Jewish sentiment in the UK?
Just watch that white liberal prick on News 24 asking a Jew if Anelka has been taken out of context and brought up how it is OK for Spurs fans to call themselves YIDs.
Here’s something for that tosser to ruminate about, If a white guy called somebody in public: A NIgger, A Paki or even a Gipo. His feet wouldn’t touch the ground and he would be out of a Job. We saw something similar with:
Roy Hunnerford
Kilroy Silk
Carol Thatcher
and many other innocent people who said the wrong thing and weren’t allowed the chance to explain themselves.
Yes Racism is bad, but it cuts both ways and when we see Muslims getting away with racial hatred by being defended by the liberal elite, all it will do is ensure more people will gravitate to the far right.
The bBC, the traitors within our Midst.
I still have a hard time understanding how Spurs fans calling themselves Yids is a negative. They’re not behaving badly and then saying, “We’re Yids”, or anything like that, are they? The one instance in Europe or Britain where people aren’t ashamed to be associated with Jews, and people want to call it racist? Perhaps I’m misinformed about that phenomenon.
I don’t know about Hunnerford or Silk, but as for Carol Thatcher, she was given the chance to explain herself. Actually, she was given the chance to confess her racism or face the sack. The BBC 1 Controller (who initially defended Jonathan Ross over a well known offensive on-air incident) required her to confess to racist intent in addition to apologizing for any offense caused. Very Maoist. Thatcher was willing to apologize but was foolish enough to insist that she didn’t mean it in a racist way.
Curiously, the Strictly guy who called somebody a Paki was required only to apologize for offending. He was not required to confess to racist intent, and in fact was allowed to say he wasn’t a racist and didn’t mean it that way while apologizing.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news/a12976/bbc-takes-kilroy-off-air-after-anti-arab-rant.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2099068/Bradford-headmaster-Ray-Honeyford–hounded-warning-perils-multiculturalism–dies-saddened-vindicated-man.html
I’m aware of the incident, but not aware of whether or not Silk got the same chance to apologize. Of course, he said all that on air, which is a lot more than making a reference to a “huggable golliwog” off air, in the green room in front of a few luvvies. Silk certainly couldn’t claim he didn’t mean his comments in a negative way.
Bbc are still trying to say is it really anti Semitic, or anti state. Radio 2 sports journo tried to argue the case for the latter.
Yet again the bbc are totally on the wrong side to the majority of right thinking people.
They’re also being dishonest.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/20/maajid-nawaz-cartoon_n_4631609.html….oh dear,what is going on here
the met police have just said on lbc radio london that they cant arrest and investigate anelka because nobody has made a complaint against him,they wouldl like to leave it at that and hope nobdoy makes complaints for politacal reasons,i think them complaints should start rolling in to the met in london and the latest i have heard is that the jewish chronicle did not know about no complaint have been made they are going to file a complaint against anelka tonight to the met police.
Try to imagine a white English player running to the touch line and thrusting his hand into the air in a fascist salute. The bloke would be fortunate to avoid going to the Tower of London. He would be roundly (and rightly)condemned from every quarter and the dear old Beeb would be at the front of the queue baying for his blood.
I just can’t imagine there being any nonsense such as “Is it really anti Semitic?” and “Has this been taken out of context?”
The usual talking heads on any race issue seem to be strangely muted.
I wonder why?
The BBC didn’t hide it’s anger at Paolo Di Canio, or let him forget his ‘fascist’ salute. Somehow the BBC never manages to mention any motive Anelka might have, or any religious belief he might have.
3 spurs fans charged today for saying the word yid,john terry dragged through the courts and found not guilty, no action against mr anelka by the police ? no uaf demos against him ?
the police and the cps turn a blind eye to racist incidents and hate crimes and committed by the muslim community on non muslims
I caught the David Baddiel interview on Newsnight last night. The interviewer asked: “Is it more complicated, nuanced, if you like, because Dieudonné is a comedian?”
Yeh, because Jim Davidson had the BBC media luvvies pondering over the nuances of his “Chalky” act didn’t they?
I confess I was only half-listening, but am sure last night’s News at Ten stated that Dieudonné used the gesture in an anti-establishment way, but that some viewed it as anti- Semitic. They didn’t appear to say he claimed to use it as an anti-establishment gesture.
As in “Russell Brand” is a comedian then?
Just a flag of convenience to be a hypocritical and abusive creep, but claim to be “ironic” when trouble might threaten.
The likes of Lenny Bruce and Jerry Sadowitz started it…and the homopathetic dilutions of that “good rebellion” are now with us in the form of…well, obviously Hardy, Steel and Thomas to name but three BBC pets.
Funny too that Anelka being a Muslim convert isn`t given as reason enough for him to do this…as we know he`s not the brightest or most stable of blokes, so just a copycat of Anjems probably.
But why didn`t Baddiel mention the Big Mahoot on that elephant in their room?…he is Jewish isn`t he? He ought to know of that.