[Albion] 'Football banning order for Antisemitic abuse'

[chip]

Three year banning order? Life surely. Being openly racist to innocent people - or in this case antisemitic - is absolutely unacceptable.

I’m drunk all the time, and I’ve never once in my life felt the need to do something hurtful like that.

She got off very lightly and can do one.

I'd like to think that people should have the opportunity to change, and maybe an incentive. I've been on the receiving end of antisemitic abuse, I'd rather the abuser confronted their own behaviour than had some nonbehavioural changing punishment. Hopefuly, this person will reflect on their ignorance and stupidity and realise their own problems aren't cause by random innocent people.

 

[Weststander]

Sorry if it offends, here’s the racist.
https://www.brightonandhovenews.org...rom-football-grounds-over-anti-semitic-abuse/

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Sorry if it offends, here’s the racist.
https://www.brightonandhovenews.org...rom-football-grounds-over-anti-semitic-abuse/

firm N

 

[Justice]

firm N

Seconded

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Context is irrelevant

The insinuation is antisemitism/racism is ok if people aren’t minding their own business.

It simply doesn’t matter what the target of the abuse is doing, whether they are ‘innocent’ or involved in some kind of disagreement with the abuser, whether you have a personal grievance with them or not. It doesn’t even matter if they are a convicted criminal, racism is racism, period.

What is important that all forms of racism are treated with equal abhorrence and that we all agree there is never a justification for discrimination on the grounds of race or colour etc (which I think we all do)

As said, the Club acted firmly and rightly.

It really wasn't. You are reading too much into an innocent post.
And I'm not trying to be funny here.

 

[Zeberdi]

It really wasn't. You are reading too much into an innocent post.
And I'm not trying to be funny here.

I was stating an opinion like everyone else here and suddenly I’m accused of trying to start an argument - my post has been taken as some sort of disagreement or argument - it wasn’t. Or accusation I was simply expressing a point that it is irrelevant legally whether the victim of abuse is innocent/minding their own business or up to their necks in it. Surely that is irrefutable as is the actions/behaviour of the abused.

I wasn’t disagreeing with anything anyone said, but adding a POV to the discussion. Not sure why that’s seen as so contentious when it’s stating how the law treats racial abuse.

Fair enough if people don’t agree BUT Again. I concluded that last post by saying:

“What is important that all forms of racism are treated with equal abhorrence and that we all agree there is never a justification for discrimination on the grounds of race or colour etc (which I think we all do)

As said, the Club acted firmly and rightly.”

So I’ll leave it there.

No offence meant.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I was stating an opinion like everyone else here and suddenly I’m accused of trying to start an argument - my post has been taken as some sort of disagreement or argument - it wasn’t. I was saying it is irrelevant legally whether the victim of abuse is innocent/minding their own business or up to their necks in it.

I wasn’t disagreeing with anything anyone said, but adding a POV to the discussion. Not sure why that’s seen as so contentious when it’s stating how the law treats racial abuse.

Fair enough if people don’t agree BUT Again. I concluded that last post by saying:

“What is important that all forms of racism are treated with equal abhorrence and that we all agree there is never a justification for discrimination on the grounds of race or colour etc (which I think we all do)

As said, the Club acted firmly and rightly.”

I said you were reading too much into the comment, not trying to start an argument. That was another respondent.

 

[Zeberdi]

I said you were reading too much into the comment, not trying to start an argument. That was another respondent.

I wasn’t reading anything into any body’s comment - seriously

I simply said context is irrelevant - racial abuse is racial abuse.

(If people have misunderstood that, or me in stating that have taken offence then sincere apologies but that’s the law )

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I wasn’t reading anything into any body’s comment - seriously

I simply said context is irrelevant - racial abuse is raical abuse.

OK, apologies.

 

[pay no mind]

 

[portslade seagull]

Thankfully our chairman and owner wasn't there to witness it

 

[Hotchilidog]

Promptly? The incident was in October 2023.

Didn’t read that bit. Glad it was dealt with no matter how tardily.

 

[Justice]

Thankfully our chairman and owner wasn't there to witness it

Which makes it even more insane they may well have been guests of our owner.

 

[HangletonGull]

Sorry if it offends, here’s the racist.
https://www.brightonandhovenews.org...rom-football-grounds-over-anti-semitic-abuse/

State of it

 

[Eeyore]

Perhaps a Jewish poster could correct me, but the term 'anti-semitic' and indeed the charge that it was religiously aggravated confuses me. 'Anti-semitic' is surely another phrase for 'racist'. Jews are a race of people. One of the oldest recognised and probably the most persecuted.

But describing it as anti-semitic almost seems to suggest it's bad, but not as bad as racism. There may be Russian Jews, British Jews etc etc, but they are still a race.

 

[clapham_gull]

Perhaps a Jewish poster could correct me, but the term 'anti-semitic' and indeed the charge that it was religiously aggravated confuses me. 'Anti-semitic' is surely another phrase for 'racist'. Jews are a race of people. One of the oldest recognised and probably the most persecuted.

But describing it as anti-semitic almost seems to suggest it's bad, but not as bad as racism. There may be Russian Jews, British Jews etc etc, but they are still a race.

Semantically, I've never considered it that way. "Islamophobic", "white nationalist" all the same way to describe knuckle draggers.

But then I'm not Jewish.

 

[aolstudios]

Perhaps a Jewish poster could correct me, but the term 'anti-semitic' and indeed the charge that it was religiously aggravated confuses me. 'Anti-semitic' is surely another phrase for 'racist'. Jews are a race of people. One of the oldest recognised and probably the most persecuted.

But describing it as anti-semitic almost seems to suggest it's bad, but not as bad as racism. There may be Russian Jews, British Jews etc etc, but they are still a race.

Correct

 

[Zeberdi]

Perhaps a Jewish poster could correct me, but the term 'anti-semitic' and indeed the charge that it was religiously aggravated confuses me. 'Anti-semitic' is surely another phrase for 'racist'. Jews are a race of people. One of the oldest recognised and probably the most persecuted.

But describing it as anti-semitic almost seems to suggest it's bad, but not as bad as racism. There may be Russian Jews, British Jews etc etc, but they are still a race.

I haven’t seen the original charges and not sure I understand your question but ‘antisemitism’ is a specific form of racism that targets Jews. It is no worse or ‘better’ than a crime motivated by eg Islamophobia or skin colour.

’Religiously aggravated’ crime is a specific hate crime where the perpetrator is motivated by hatred or prejudice towards someone based on their religion (or perceived religion) in this case Judaism - (so it was motivated by antisemitism) but again, haven’t seen the original report.

This aggravating factor (which makes Religiously Aggravated crimes more serious than the same crime without a racially motivated component) is reflected in Sentencing.

1. Racial or religious aggravation – statutory provisions – Sentencing

www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk

 

[Weststander]

Perhaps a Jewish poster could correct me, but the term 'anti-semitic' and indeed the charge that it was religiously aggravated confuses me. 'Anti-semitic' is surely another phrase for 'racist'. Jews are a race of people. One of the oldest recognised and probably the most persecuted.

But describing it as anti-semitic almost seems to suggest it's bad, but not as bad as racism. There may be Russian Jews, British Jews etc etc, but they are still a race.

A quick look online at UK convictions show racism or religious aggravated convictions variously for perpetrators of acts against Jews or Muslims. All in the armoury of the CPS. Antisemites have been convicted of racism crimes.

 

[Eeyore]

I haven’t seen the original charges and not sure I understand your question but ‘antisemitism’ is a specific form of racism that targets Jews. It is no worse or ‘better’ than a crime motivated by eg Islamophobia or skin colour.

’Religiously aggravated’ crime is a specific hate crime where the perpetrator is motivated by hatred or prejudice towards someone based on their religion (or perceived religion) in this case Judaism - (so it was motivated by antisemitism) but again, haven’t seen the original report. This aggravating factor is reflected in Sentencing.

Yes, that's my point. I often hear that phrase, but very few seem to refer to the targeting of Jews as racism. There are still folk who think the it's just a religion, which Judaism indeed is. But ultimately the Jews are a race of people, so this is likely less to do with religion and more to do with race. Thus racism.