Monday 23 November 2015

Lost in Translation


 
Lost in translation

I read last night’s statement from the Celtic Trust and have to say I was somewhat puzzled.  It’s worth reproducing it here so you can judge for yourself the veracity of its contents. It stated…

‘’Following the disgraceful remarks made by Ian Bankier, Chairman of Celtic PLC to the Celtic PLC AGM on Friday 20th November, the undersigned organisations feel it necessary to express our anger at these allegations.

Mr Bankier's claim that fans opposed to the re-election of Mr Livingston to the Celtic board have engaged in 'criminally racist' social media postings is an unforgivable slur on the Celtic support. For him to then evoke the name of Brother Walfrid to justify his unfounded assertion is utterly shameful. We are now, since the AGM took place, aware that there were some postings on social media which we condemn and we would support the club, and Mr Livingston, should they take action against those individuals.  None of this is a justification for the generalised smearing of the Celtic support and, in particular, those of us who voted against Mr Livingston’s re-election.  Mr Bankier committed an error of judgement and showed a complete lack of control at the AGM and this is not acceptable in a Celtic Chairman.

We would like to publically condemn his unprofessional behaviour and the subsequent attempts to suggest that his words had been taken out of context, as this patently was not the case. We call on all other members of the PLC board to denounce these comments. Ultimately, we are of the belief that Mr Bankier is no longer able to redeem himself following this attack on the Celtic support, and his failure to retract and apologise immediately afterwards, and we call on him to give serious consideration to his position as Chairman of Celtic PLC.’’

This strongly worded statement is seriously flawed. Firstly Ian Bankier didn’t say that all Celtic supporters opposed to Ian Livingston’s reappointment ‘have engaged in 'criminally racist' social media postings’ as the statement implies.  He was clearly referring to the minority who overstepped the mark and used bigoted language to describe Mr Livingston. Who could possibly deny that statements from social media such as the following are anything other than morally repugnant and against everything Celtic stands for...

‘’Get this Ashkenazi cunt out of OUR club and take that other fake Jew prick Biton with him. This is typical of their sort, infiltrating and destroying every country and establisment from within"’

‘We need to rid our club of this Zionist cancer immediately. The thought of a dirty Zionist fucker being in charge of our club is very alarming."

I could find more statements like those on Facebook or Twitter but those two sentences serve to illustrate the point that some went too far in their criticism of Mr Livingston and strayed into territory which could be construed by a Judge as ‘criminally racist.’ So if we agree that some who claim to follow Celtic have been guilty of such utterances, and it really is beyond doubt as even the Celtic Trust admit, then where does that leave Mr Bankier? Well, firstly his actual words at the AGM were as follows…

(Mr Livingston) has been subject to a torrent of utterly base personal abuse conducted over social media over recent weeks. The messages posted, in quite a few cases are criminally racist and in all cases the vocabulary chosen is base and highly abusive and what sickens me to the core is that the campaign is conducted in the name of (Celtic founder) Brother Walfrid.’

It’s clear to me that the ‘all cases’ he refers to in this statement are the people who have brought forth this ‘torrent of utterly base personal abuse’ and no one else. To extrapolate from the above sentence that he meant all fans opposed to Ian Livingston’s reappointment is at best disingenuous and at worst mischief making. If that wasn’t clear enough Mr Bankier then stated on Celtic’s website…

 ‘I have not branded our supporters racist and it is outrageous to suggest that I would ever do that. I was only referring to a small number of specific comments which have been made on social media, which I believe are unacceptable, I know Celtic fans would agree with me.’

Despite Mr Bankier releasing this statement the scorn of some on social media was poured down on his head. He was advised to ‘go’ by some and take Mr Livingston with him. The statement from the Celtic Trust followed and I must confess to scratching my head as to what he had actually said which deserved the strong words flying his way. If his AGM statement wasn’t clear to some, his follow up statement certainly was. Are those who wrote the Celtic Trust statement actually suggesting that Ian Bankier is lying?  Hundreds of shareholders and media types witnessed his statement at Celtic Park and it was no doubt recorded too. He condemned foul abuse which certainly deserved the harshest condemnation. To suggest he condemned all who opposed the re-appointment of Mr Livingston to the Board is not only wrong but it is demonstrably wrong.

You would think by the whole tone of the Celtic Trust statement with its language of condemnation (slur, unforgivable, shameful, smearing, etc.) that Bankier had committed a very public offence of great importance. A closer examination of the facts shows nothing of the sort. Things have either been lost in translation or those making the accusations against him are doing so for their own purposes. Either way this whole mess offers nothing but mud for those with a dislike of Celtic to throw in the club’s face.

No doubt I’ll need to dig out the tin hat when some read this and accuse me of taking sides or being in the Board’s pocket and other such nonsense. So what I suggest you do is check the facts for yourself, read the reports of the AGM and contrast them to the ludicrous version of events portrayed in the Celtic Trust statement. I offer only one man’s opinion based on the facts as I perceive them. You’re perfectly entitled to verify things for yourself and I hope you do. Too many are prepared to believe the worst without checking the facts. If you’re going to accuse someone of ‘generalised smearing’ of the Celtic support you’d best have more evidence than I’ve seen so far.

 

 

 

 

10 comments:

  1. I think the issue is the use of the word 'torrent' of criminally racist abuse. Having followed the issue quite closely I had not seen any racist abuse. Plenty of abuse directed towards his political beliefs but none about his religious inclination. Indeed, when I saw the claim I immediately thought he was English and some fans had abused him based on his race. As it is, I have seen no evidence of a 'torrent' of racial abuse and neither have most fans. The issue of Lord Livingston was always going to come up at the AGM. This was no off the cuff remark. Around 10,000 fans had signed a petition with regard to this matter. The Celtic chairman chose to deliberately conflate their views with a couple of racists ranting online. This served to cloud the issue and allowed newspapers to run with headlines about racist Celtic fans attacking a director. He threw the general reputation of Celtic fans under a bus in order to detract from the genuine concerns of thousands of supporters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're quite entitled to hold whatever view you choose on the issue but I respectfully disagree with much of your response. He 'allowed' the press to run with it? When did the press ever need permission to dis Celtic? He didn't say a 'torrent of racial abuse' he said 'torrent of utterly base personal abuse' and then touched on a 'few cases' of racial abuse.. It's bending verifiable facts to suit opinion which muddies the water. Read his comments again. HH

      Delete
  2. I completely agree & back the board on what was said & how it was dealt with. An element within the Celtic support lecture & push their own political agenda on fellow supporters at every turn. I don't care about what etims or the green brigade say. They don't represent me. This is an inclusive club so keep your leftist politics & political banners out of Celtic. You are damaging the club. You are damaging its reputation. You are dragging its name through the mud time & time again with your skewed views you feel we all should feel. Well we don't. You do not represent the Celtic support so how about you guys pop your massive egos & stop making reference to brother ealfrid like you know him. It's disgusting to use his name in such ways as a political vehicle. You have twisted the words which were actually uttered beyond belief & have shown yourselves up to be paranoid, selfish, self serving & would rather put your own opinions & views in front of the good of the club. Honestly shame on you all.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A club will be formed for the maintenance of the dinner tables for the children and the unemployed. That was the view of brother walfrid. The club was to be charitable in its intent, in other words to provide relief within the confines of the system. As a socialist I have to say the club is not socialist, it is a football club that many socialists support but that has also a strong conservative current but tinged with catholic social policy. That will always cause a certain tension between these factions. Thus, while I don't agree with Lord Livingston politically I would cheer side by side with him when the boys score a goal. As for the statement I don't believe it was aimed at the majority of Celtic fans who wouldnt tolerate the abuse that has been cited. Put this to bed and move on. HH!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why did the chairman Mr Bankier have to stand up in public and make such statements at all.
    Maybe a more diplomatic reply as you would expect from someone of Mr Bankier's standing would have satisfied,and not given the press anything to write about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe because intolerance should be challenged at every opportunity whether it is religious, racial or politica?

      Delete
  5. Why not deal with the online comments at the time instead of waiting till the AGM and using it as a way to take he heat off Livingston. Or have I just answered my own question

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Take the heat off Livingston for being victimised because he holds different political views than some of the numpties in the Celtic support. Aye they were bringing up the disgusting personal attacks for that reason & not because the fans raised an online petition to oust him & brought it up at the meeting...have a look at yourself. Paranoid nonsense blaming others & deflecting from the issue.

      Delete
  6. tell you what, i am shocked with these words against jews coming from so called celtic supporters.please please if these are your feelings go find some other football team to support

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete