Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[BTRFTG]

6 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Wael's inaction regards Joey's antics can hardly come as a surprise given he's from a country that is anti-Israel, and despite being more progressive than most in the region, is still a country where women are treated as second class citizens. 

Strange that as the times I've been there, certainly post the end of war peace treaty, Jordan (along with Egypt) have been Israel's staunchest ally in the Arabic world. Probably because economic and security protections their treaties provide are of mutual benefit in a volatile region.

You'd also struggle to gain the impression woman are second class citizens in Jordan, though like their male counterparts if you're a migrant worker you're not rated that highly. Sharia Law has aspects not seen in this country since the 18th century but it's impacts aren't widespread in a daily context.

[BTRFTG]

13 minutes ago, Stortz said:

When somebody shows you what they are, you should always believe them. Hence, sad and unfortunate.

I won't debate it with you any further, we'll let your own words speak for you.

Well, that's cleared things up.....

[LondonBristolian]

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

For sure I do. The Jewish Nation has revised history for centuries and continue so to do till today. Why else might they experience such hostility?

At least we now know why you are defending anti-Semitism. I am guessing the next step for you is claiming that your inaccurate sweeping generalisations about Jewish people aren’t anti-Semitic either. You will be wrong to say so when you predictably do.

[Bar BS3]

54 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

You posed a question which I answered. An answer which is neither sad or unfortunate. Pretty much all the Jewish comment I've seen incorrectly references what they believe Barton said not that he said. In the case of the woeful Abrahams he posted his comment under a clip of the original interview. He proclaims himself a reporter (sic) yet somehow misquotes Barton saying something the video proves was never said.

Like Barton I imagine this was an honest mistake by an ignorant person. I don't see Abrahams' head being called for though.

Personally, I think you are completely missing the point. 

I'd imagine that very few people are condemning the quote, in direct relation to solidarity with the Jewish community. 

I'd think that most are simply condemning the comparison of one of the worst atrocities to have happened in all of history, to a bad performance on a football pitch. 

It wouldn't surprise me if Barton was thick enough to think he was being clever, or amusing, by selecting such a comparison. He's always using big words, that don't actually fit with what he's saying, but he seems to think make him sound a little more intellectual than he is. 

Nobody would accidentally use the term as a slip of a tongue example - he must use it as a term to describe something bad, thinking its appropriate. 

It's not, he's a grade A bellend and their handling of the whole situation has been an embarrassing (for them) farce..! 

 

[BrightCiderLife]

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

I'd agree that editing the video was a woeful mistake by The Gas media team, they should have left it up in its full glory so as reinforce the tongue-tied thug was speaking garbage, not referencing an event imagined by many.

 

Would you like the opportunity to clarify what you meant to say here as I think I know what you’re saying but I hope I’m mistaken? 

[BrightCiderLife]

6 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Those clamouring for Barton's sacrificial offering might be so kind as to provide a comprehensive list of words, any of which if accidentally and incorrectly used in a single utterance, might automatically demand an individual or organisation's 'cancellation'.

Those who misquote Barton, interpret what they'd like to think he said, or pretend his use of the word holocaust might be construed as making sense within the context of what he said, reveal far more about themselves than the thuggish lowlife they wish cancelled.

Whilst language changes and adapts history should not and must not be rewritten. I see the tw*t Abrahams seeking publicity, others referencing an imagined impact on the Jewish Community. History highlights that multiple cultures across the globe have their own terms for sacrificial offerings, the Jewish have their own but that isn't Holocaust, that word being appropriated from The Greeks and I don't see many referencing Barton alienating the owners of tavernas the length of Gloucester Road, all burning their souvlski to a crisp.  The word isn't Jewish, it isn't owned by the Jewish race or for their exclusive use, though like the West Bank many like to think it is.

I’m not sure getting into the etymology is of any assistance. The word he used brings to mind a very particular atrocity which is of no comparison to a footballer not being on form. It is that comparison which is offensive (if you need me to spell it out, millions of deaths are not the same as a few misplaced passes). It is not to do with any specific religions, races or creeds, but straight forward decency.

I don’t see many on here calling for him to be sacked as a result, people are simply saying what he said was crass and he should apologise for the (unintentional, perhaps) offence he has caused.
 

You and others might call it woke, or cancel culture but it’s really just about thinking before you speak and not saying things that any right minded people would say are wrong and inappropriate. His and the club’s failure to apologise is by this point worse than him ranting without thinking. A quick tweet clarifying he didn’t mean it on Saturday evening would have dealt with it, now it looks like he/they think the comparison between their player’s loss of form and the systematic murder and torture of millions is a fair one. They are wrong to think so and are rightly criticised for it. 

[TheReds]

1 hour ago, BrightCiderLife said:

Would you like the opportunity to clarify what you meant to say here as I think I know what you’re saying but I hope I’m mistaken? 

Certainly not saying the Holocaust was an imagined event, unsure how you have got to that conclusion, unless I am completely mistaken.

As in words being offensive etc, and how language has changed, it has gone so crazy now that I wouldn't be surprised of any single word being banned/offensive as we now have people/organisations that have completely lost the plot when it comes to language and offense. When people are getting offended by the words woman, mother, breastfeeding etc etc then we are in serious trouble.

[RedHienz]

1 hour ago, BrightCiderLife said:

Would you like the opportunity to clarify what you meant to say here as I think I know what you’re saying but I hope I’m mistaken? 

Its very clear they are referring to what first comes to mind when the word holocaust is used.

Fml.

[GreedyHarry]

Blinking’ heck, we’re getting dragged down to their level with this debate. Sure this was a thread for taking the P out of Rovers, not for debating extreme politics. Cue attacks from all sides. 

Edited October 26, 2021 by GreedyHarry

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, LondonBristolian said:

At least we now know why you are defending anti-Semitism. I am guessing the next step for you is claiming that your inaccurate sweeping generalisations about Jewish people aren’t anti-Semitic either. You will be wrong to say so when you predictably do.

Thanks for telling me who or what I am.

I'll simply leave it by saying the modern state of Israel is, de facto, based on Zionist Revisionism, hence my point about revisionists.

But that's the point. Change history and, well, who knows what one might become?

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, Bar BS3 said:

I'd think that most are simply condemning the comparison of one of the worst atrocities to have happened in all of history, to a bad performance on a football pitch. 

Yawn, save he didn't do that.....

But what's the truth when all that matters is political posing?

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, BrightCiderLife said:

Would you like the opportunity to clarify what you meant to say here as I think I know what you’re saying but I hope I’m mistaken? 

Good point. The imagined event being Barton conflating a footballer's performance with The Holocaust, not the fact that atrocity existed.

[Bar BS3]

4 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Yawn, save he didn't do that.....

But what's the truth when all that matters is political posing?

Eh..? 

No idea what you're on about now. 

[Red Army 75]

Remember when rovers got relegated to the conference. How we laughed 

[LondonBristolian]

6 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Thanks for telling me who or what I am.

I'll simply leave it by saying the modern state of Israel is, de facto, based on Zionist Revisionism, hence my point about revisionists.

But that's the point. Change history and, well, who knows what one might become?

If you post anti-Semitic stuff, you are going to be called anti-Semitic. If Barton makes trite and offensive comparisons of his team’s performance to the genocide of six million people, he’s going to be called trite and offensive.

How have we reached a point in society where people are utterly incapable of taking responsibility for their words and actions and instead blame everyone else?

[GreedyHarry]

2 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Remember when rovers got relegated to the conference. How we laughed 

And at their grotto.

[RedHienz]

Just now, GreedyHarry said:

And at their grotto.

With a team wearing their cats 

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, BrightCiderLife said:

’m not sure getting into the etymology is of any assistance. The word he used brings to mind a very particular atrocity which is of no comparison to a footballer not being on form.

Partly agree, but it goes to the root of what one chooses to perceive, not what's actually said.  It's Meta Vs Para language. Barton's particular choice of word made no sense. You can see him struggling to think of something to say, he plucks the word 'holocaust' from somewhere but contextually it's meaningless. He might have said 'hologram' but a player can't have one of those either.

Reading these posts it's now fact Barton said: "The Holocaust;" matters not he didn't.

[BTRFTG]

7 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

If you post anti-Semitic stuff, you are going to be called anti-Semitic. If Barton makes trite and offensive comparisons of his team’s performance to the genocide of six million people, he’s going to be called trite and offensive.

How have we reached a point in society where people are utterly incapable of taking responsibility for their words and actions and instead blame everyone else?

Care to explain how and where I've demonstrated (your perceived) anti-Semitism?

But as you've again reiterated an untruth about Barton, ( go on, reference exactly where he conflated genocide,) you have demonstrated the problem with modern society? A society in which people are utterly incapable of informing and articulating their own thoughts, or perchance are afraid so to do, thus present as intellectual sheep.

And all because an inarticulate thug used an inappropriate word. Butterflies and wheels ...

[Bar BS3]

8 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Partly agree, but it goes to the root of what one chooses to perceive, not what's actually said.  It's Meta Vs Para language. Barton's particular choice of word made no sense. You can see him struggling to think of something to say, he plucks the word 'holocaust' from somewhere but contextually it's meaningless. He might have said 'hologram' but a player can't have one of those either.

Reading these posts it's now fact Barton said: "The Holocaust;" matters not he didn't.

"A holocaust", "The Holocaust"... Do you really think that someone who's dense enough to use that as a descriptive term for a teams performance, has really gathered the background knowledge on the difference between the 2 subtle differences...? 

I'd think not and he's just an idiot who'd thought he'd come up with a "clever/original" way of describing someing as really bad. 

The bloke is a knob and I think you credit him with far more insight than he deserves. 

[LondonBristolian]

5 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Care to explain how and where I've demonstrated (your perceived) anti-Semitism?

But as you've again reiterated an untruth about Barton, ( go on, reference exactly where he conflated genocide,) you have demonstrated the problem with modern society? A society in which people are utterly incapable of informing and articulating their own thoughts, or perchance are afraid so to do, thus present as intellectual sheep.

And all because an inarticulate thug used an inappropriate word. Butterflies and wheels ...

If you need someone to explain to you how making inaccurate sweeping negative generalisations about Jewish people is anti-Semitism then you may need to invest in a dictionary.

If you can’t understand how describing a poor performance in a football match with a word which is rarely used by itself except in reference to the murder of six million people is conflating genocide then you may need a history lesson.

But I don’t think you need either of those things. I think you need to grow up and learn skills in self-reflection.

[Bar BS3]

2 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Care to explain how and where I've demonstrated (your perceived) anti-Semitism?

But as you've again reiterated an untruth about Barton, ( go on, reference exactly where he conflated genocide,) you have demonstrated the problem with modern society? A society in which people are utterly incapable of informing and articulating their own thoughts, or perchance are afraid so to do, thus present as intellectual sheep.

And all because an inarticulate thug used an inappropriate word. Butterflies and wheels ...

Tell you what... Why don't you tell us what possible reasoning you have to believe that JB was referring to anything other than the same Holocaust as everyone else has taken him to be referencing in his interview....? 

You really think that that plank carefully selected the exact choice of his words, to carefully, but clearly, differentiate between the dictionary definition (which wouldn't actually make sense, with what he was trying to get across) or what everyone else has heard and taken issue with..?! 

It's only you, trying to come across as some accedimic linguist, who is making excuses for what he said. Not, I suspect, with any validation, other than to point out that you know the difference between "a holocaust" & "The Holocaust" 

I'd wager good money on it that JB didn't know the difference, when he made such stupid reference, in relation to his football teams performance..! 

[Banjo Island]

24 minutes ago, GreedyHarry said:

And at their grotto.

They are preparing the tinsel and baloons as we speak

[Bar BS3]

1 minute ago, LondonBristolian said:

If you need someone to explain to you how making inaccurate sweeping negative generalisations about Jewish people is anti-Semitism then you may need to invest in a dictionary.

If you can’t understand how describing a poor performance in a football match with a word which is rarely used by itself except in reference to the murder of six million people is conflating genocide then you may need a history lesson.

But I don’t think you need either of those things. I think you need to grow up and learn skills in self-reflection.

@BTRFTG seems to be getting turned on by the fact that he has identified that JB said "A holocaust" not "THE Holocaust' and trying to defend him on the basis that they aren't reference to the same thing..!

I'm not sure if he's being anti anything, or just making himself looks silly by being a literal smart arse.....

Either way, he appears to be talking shite, and JB knew full well what he was referring to, without realising the reaction he was going to create by it - because he's a bloody idiot..! 

[LondonBristolian]

Just now, Bar BS3 said:

@BTRFTG seems to be getting turned on by the fact that he has identified that JB said "A holocaust" not "THE Holocaust' and trying to defend him on the basis that they aren't reference to the same thing..!

I'm not sure if he's being anti anything, or just making himself looks silly by being a literal smart arse.....

Either way, he appears to be talking shite, and JB knew full well what he was referring to, without realising the reaction he was going to create by it - because he's a bloody idiot..! 

Oh I get all that. The issue with it is that - as you say - it is utter nonsense.

It is like trying to defend someone who has insulted someone’s mother by saying “no, he genuinely mistook her for a female dog. He had no idea there was another definition…”

[HitchinRed]

One might suggest that, had Joey Barton genuinely intended to use the term ‘holocaust’ in its literal sense, then he would have been happy to clarify this and apologise for any unintended offense taken from any misunderstanding.

Unfortunately, he hasn’t.

Edited October 26, 2021 by HitchinRed

[Bar BS3]

2 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Oh I get all that. The issue with it is that - as you say - it is utter nonsense.

It is like trying to defend someone who has insulted someone’s mother by saying “no, he genuinely mistook her for a female dog. He had no idea there was another definition…”

Absolutely! 

His defence is clearly just him wanting to take some high ground and puff his chest out, so that we all sit in awe at his knowledge of the subtle difference between the 2 possibilities. 

His knowledge is impressive - his belief that JB knew, or meant the difference, makes him look almost a foolish as JB himself..! 

It wouldn't surprise me if he is a lawyer, who makes a living by getting rapists & murderers off the hook on technicalities..! Well done mate, very clever - hope you feel proud...! 

[Bar BS3]

4 minutes ago, HitchinRed said:

One might suggest that, had Joey Barton genuinely intended to use the term ‘holocaust’ in its literal sense, then he would have been happy to clarify this and apologise for any unintended offense taken from any misunderstanding.

Unfortunately, he hasn’t.

Yes, I'm sure there's every possibility that JB genuinely intended to use the dictionaries definition of the phrase he used - because that would make perfect sense, in the context of his comments....!

[LondonBristolian]

9 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said:

Absolutely! 

His defence is clearly just him wanting to take some high ground and puff his chest out, so that we all sit in awe at his knowledge of the subtle difference between the 2 possibilities. 

His knowledge is impressive - his belief that JB knew, or meant the difference, makes him look almost a foolish as JB himself..! 

It wouldn't surprise me if he is a lawyer, who makes a living by getting rapists & murderers off the hook on technicalities..! Well done mate, very clever - hope you feel proud...! 

To be honest, it is far more law student than lawyer. A lawyer would know that juries are sophisticated enough to understand the difference between the way the meaning a word is defined in a dictionary and the way meaning is understood by society.

No lawyer on Earth would bother claiming Barton was using “Holocaust” as defined in the dictionary because no jury on Earth would be taken in.

[Monkeh]

12 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

To be honest, it is far more law student than lawyer. A lawyer would know that juries are sophisticated enough to understand the difference between the way the meaning a word is defined in a dictionary and the way meaning is understood by society.

No lawyer on Earth would bother claiming Barton was using “Holocaust” as defined in the dictionary because no jury on Earth would be taken in.

Except the ones who wanted to sue Wycombe