Agreed. Under no circumstances is this professionally or socially acceptable.
He should've merely told Aliu to turn off the music or wear headphones, instead of trying to shock him by quoting lyrics from the song in question.
If someone was playing the infamous Chris Rock "black people vs n-----s" bit on repeat in the dressing room, and someone lost their cool and said, "I'm sick of that n----- bit, turn that n----- bit off!" That would be the stupidest way to address it, and easily the most offensive way to describe the bit. That clearly can be explained with ignorance, and less malice.
But it's very easy to see how the takeaway could be three fold:
1. n----- bit refers to the bit using the word n----- so much
2. n----- bit refers callously to the comedian telling the bit
3. n----- bit refers to the person playing the bit in the first place
From the letter, BP wants us to believe it was 1. Aliu's tweets make it seem he took it as 3. Most people on social media are taking it as 2 or 3, and reacting as if it was 4.... "turn off that bit, n-----"
Is this an attempt to diminish his actions? Because that's what it's coming across as. Just trying to make sure it's what you're intending.
We don't need to look to history for discrimination of whites. We only need to look at what is happening to white farmers in South Africa in the present. Some of whom are being murdered for their land. And just to be clear, I was against Apartheid, too.
Or are they just a minority group in South Africa and thus don't meet your definition of "whites" much like the Irish, Italians, Jews and Mormons who fled westward?
You seem to be confused. You're welcome to your confused opinion.
Again, just do some basic research and you’ll find yourself better educated.
Let’s look at South Africa, if you want. Let’s look at how white people, 9% of the population, own 72% of the land. Let’s look at the farm attacks, which target both the farmers who are white and the farm workers, who are overwhelmingly black. Or, are they not really “black” to you because they work for a white person? (That’s how you argue, right? Am I playing your silly game well enough?). While we’re at it, let’s ask ourselves why we think attacks on farms that are overwhelming white-owned but count victims that are overwhelming black, is simply an attack on white people. Do black farm workers not matter to you? Do you pretend they don’t exist?
Even that aside. We’re talking about two entirely different cultures. Is your next move going to be finding somewhere where black people haven’t endured racism and pretend that racism doesn’t exist? That’s what you’re going for here?
Racism is wrong regardless of where it takes place. But racism against white people has never been an issue in our culture. There has never been systemic discrimination against people for being white in our culture, ever.
But keep going on with it and pretending black farm workers don’t exist in South Africa, and that there are no black Irish people, or Italians, or whatever. Pretending that whites are the sole victims of these acts of discrimination and violence, and eliminating any victims of colour or pretending they don’t matter, is racism. It’s disgusting.
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
I don't think its "more likely". I think it's a real stretch. As people here have said, it's a term that's been used for rap music, not because it contains the word, it's because it's music by and for black people. It's also almost certainly the case that he knew who was playing it, for the reasons set out before. Which makes his words more pointed.
And he's coached players of colour without incident? First, as we know, it takes years for these things to surface. Second, you can be racist and only have it show when dealing with a person you dislike. Things said out of anger aren't unreflective of your feelings necessarily. They are things you've said because you removed your filter.
And if he's not a racist but still used those words directed at Aliu? It makes him a terrible person who used the worst words he could think of to humiliate Aliu.
But the Seravelli quote given by Aliu is precisely that. He says n----- music, then immediately follows it up by saying it's about n-----s f---ing a--es.
Are there songs that sing about that? Yes. Yes there are. Are they appropriate for a dressing room? No, no they're not.
Did Bill Peters address it in the worst possible way? Yes, yes he did.
Was a sarcastic joke about cannon7's responses that a coach saying "turn off that #### honky tonk country music" to a dressing room full of white people is racist because the Irish and the Italians faced discrimination and some of them are cowboys. I'm with you.
Well if the Flames do nothing and not fire him what example would they be setting? Can you answer that one?
The Flames already indicated the said actions are do not reflect the organizations beliefs.
In the given circumstances, where Peters may have apologized but not specifically to Aliu, then followed it up with potentially targeting Aliu for demotion due to a personal vendetta and some other bad conduct with the physical abuse, I think the Flames should replace him. I do not see termination with cause as a viable option in this situation and I'm not sure that I think it should be, of course we will see how it plays out.
If there was only the instance of the racist remarks and nothing else, I could envision a scenario where he might be suspended, ordered to undergo sensitivity training and publicly apologize to Aliu and for the comments and be able to remain with the organization.
I guess I should have asked AFC if he was only specifically talking about high profile public positions when it comes to firing someone for past racist conduct or if he meant generally (as I took it). I'm genuinely curious if there are a lot of people that would agree with people being fired with cause for those types of past actions with different organizations. That seems like a bad idea to me, but I'm open to hearing other views.
With Peters apology and Aliu's response it now sounds like Peters is trying to get as much of his current contract paid to him as possible while Aliu is trying to getting the most out of a settlement from the NHL/Peters/Flames/Blackhawks for emotional harm and/or stalling his playing career.
It's now more of a money issue than a race/toxic culture issue.
I don't think Aliu will get any money, as it won't be easy to prove that this incident actually caused him any harm. He can't prove that he got sent down to the ECHL because of racism vs performance/merits. If he did get any money though, this will open a giant Pandora box. Lots of Jack and Jill that ever got sworn at can claim damage and get some compensation from the former employer(s).
But the Seravelli quote given by Aliu is precisely that. He says n----- music, then immediately follows it up by saying it's about n-----s f---ing a--es.
Are there songs that sing about that? Yes. Yes there are. Are they appropriate for a dressing room? No, no they're not.
Did Bill Peters address it in the worst possible way? Yes, yes he did.
Is he getting fired. Absolutely.
"n*** music" is, unfortunately, a term used by some people. And not because of the lyrics. He referenced both. If he'd only said sentence two your argument would be better. I wouldn't even be surprised if sentence two was uttered after he realized sentence one was way offside, as a pathetic backpedal.
But the Seravelli quote given by Aliu is precisely that. He says n----- music, then immediately follows it up by saying it's about n-----s f---ing a--es.
Are there songs that sing about that? Yes. Yes there are. Are they appropriate for a dressing room? No, no they're not.
Did Bill Peters address it in the worst possible way? Yes, yes he did.
Is he getting fired. Absolutely.
whens the last time you were in a dressing room full of teen/early 20s
this is absolutely appropriate songs for a dressing room, what the hell are you talking about
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to stone hands For This Useful Post:
I don't think its "more likely". I think it's a real stretch. As people here have said, it's a term that's been used for rap music, not because it contains the word, it's because it's music by and for black people. It's also almost certainly the case that he knew who was playing it, for the reasons set out before. Which makes his words more pointed.
And he's coached players of colour without incident? First, as we know, it takes years for these things to surface. Second, you can be racist and only have it show when dealing with a person you dislike. Things said out of anger aren't unreflective of your feelings necessarily. They are things you've said because you removed your filter.
And if he's not a racist but still used those words directed at Aliu? It makes him a terrible person who used the worst words he could think of to humiliate Aliu.
For clarity, Peters allegedly said "N-Sh**" not N-"Music".
While I wouldn't say it's "more likely", it is certainly a legitimate possibility.
The Following User Says Thank You to Crown Royal For This Useful Post:
I don't think Aliu will get any money, as it won't be easy to prove that this incident actually caused him any harm. He can't prove that he got sent down to the ECHL because of racism vs performance/merits.
I really have no idea what he can and cannot prove.
Is this an attempt to diminish his actions? Because that's what it's coming across as. Just trying to make sure it's what you're intending.
By no means am I trying to diminish his actions. I still think Bill Peters is in the wrong here.
But again, go look at the quote again in the Seravelli article. He angrily calls it n----- music, then follows it up by saying what he hates about the music's lyrics. It's right there.
Don't imply I'm diminishing actions. I'm trying to work out and ascribe the appropriate level of rage here.
Tell me... is there any difference whatsoever between the level of outrage that could be derived from the following two statements?
“Hey Akim, I’m sick of you playing that n----- s---,’ ... ‘I’m sick of hearing this n-----s f------ other n-----s in the ass stuff."
and
"Hey Akim, I'm sick of the music you play, n-----. Turn that s--- off. I'm sick of hearing it"
Again, context. Bill Peters comes off as an angry bully in both scenarios. But in the first one, there's a smidge of potential explanation if lyrics such as this https://bit.ly/2XTVqHj are the ones in question. If it was just Beyonce, or Earth, Wind and Fire playing... then triple yikes.
Can I spell it out any clearer that it was wrong?
Don't start ascribing malice to me. I'm just trying to wrap my head around the scenario, so as not to immediately jump on the tar and feather committee. There's at least one possible scenario here that paints Peters as an angry insensitive bully... that doesn't insinuate he's going to deny someone a loan, or disown his daughter for marrying a black person.
I really have no idea what he can and cannot prove.
His own statement to TSN would hurt him significantly. He stated that weeks later Peters was getting on him in practice and he snapped at Peters, hours later he was demoted.
What if Aliu was a punk and still is? He pushed all the right buttons and Peters lost his cool. Peters will pay the price for not keeping his temper under control. I don't feel sorry for Peters but I believe he regrets it.
Probably is a punk, he could have called him a punk or a jack ass or whatever. The English language has many words that aren't racist against a whole race of people. I have no sympathy for him. Turn that #### off the lyrics aren't appropriate. Turn that punk crap off, turn that off. Turn that f in #### off. He had lots of options.
whens the last time you were in a dressing room full of teen/early 20s
this is absolutely appropriate songs for a dressing room, what the hell are you talking about
When were you last in a dressing room of professional hockey players that age?
I've been in a lot of dressing rooms, covering sports teams, and I can't honestly say I've ever heard full-blown vulgar music. It's been all over the place, but I've never heard that type of stuff.
By no means am I trying to diminish his actions. I still think Bill Peters is in the wrong here.
But again, go look at the quote again in the Seravelli article. He angrily calls it n----- music, then follows it up by saying what he hates about the music's lyrics. It's right there.
Don't imply I'm diminishing actions. I'm trying to work out and ascribe the appropriate level of rage here.
Tell me... is there any difference whatsoever between the level of outrage that could be derived from the following two statements?
“Hey Akim, I’m sick of you playing that n----- s---,’ ... ‘I’m sick of hearing this n-----s f------ other n-----s in the ass stuff."
and
"Hey Akim, I'm sick of the music you play, n-----. Turn that s--- off. I'm sick of hearing it"
Again, context. Bill Peters comes off as an angry bully in both scenarios. But in the first one, there's a smidge of potential explanation if lyrics such as this https://bit.ly/2XTVqHj are the ones in question. If it was just Beyonce, or Earth, Wind and Fire playing... then triple yikes.
Can I spell it out any clearer that it was wrong?
Don't start ascribing malice to me. I'm just trying to wrap my head around the scenario, so as not to immediately jump on the tar and feather committee. There's at least one possible scenario here that paints Peters as an angry insensitive bully... that doesn't insinuate he's going to deny someone a loan, or disown his daughter for marrying a black person.
You claimed he was quoting the song, which is a totally invented scenario. So don't do that. I will refrain from ascribing malice when you stop using weasel words. At least your response answers my last statement.
So is this you admitting that it is not happening and that you were either misinformed or made it up? Because it is not happening, what you said is happening is not happening.
I thought you could hear the dog whistle? Is that not the case?
See the irony of this "dog whistle" business is that it's supposed to be something said with subversive racist undertones only intended to be understood by fellow racists. But why is it so easily identifiable by supposed non-racists? Not a very good dog whistle if you ask me.
But your link appears to make the case that because there are no reliable statistics to support attacks on white farmers and the fact that the crime rates in South Africa have (also?) increased -- then it must not be happening and is just white nationalist propaganda. Not very convincing if you ask me. To use another "dog whistle", it would be like saying because there were a lot of people being killed in WWII Europe and there weren't reliable statistics at the time, the Holocaust must not have happened.
Again, just do some basic research and you’ll find yourself better educated.
Let’s look at South Africa, if you want. Let’s look at how white people, 9% of the population, own 72% of the land. Let’s look at the farm attacks, which target both the farmers who are white and the farm workers, who are overwhelmingly black. Or, are they not really “black” to you because they work for a white person? (That’s how you argue, right? Am I playing your silly game well enough?). While we’re at it, let’s ask ourselves why we think attacks on farms that are overwhelming white-owned but count victims that are overwhelming black, is simply an attack on white people. Do black farm workers not matter to you? Do you pretend they don’t exist?
Even that aside. We’re talking about two entirely different cultures. Is your next move going to be finding somewhere where black people haven’t endured racism and pretend that racism doesn’t exist? That’s what you’re going for here?
Racism is wrong regardless of where it takes place. But racism against white people has never been an issue in our culture. There has never been systemic discrimination against people for being white in our culture, ever.
But keep going on with it and pretending black farm workers don’t exist in South Africa, and that there are no black Irish people, or Italians, or whatever. Pretending that whites are the sole victims of these acts of discrimination and violence, and eliminating any victims of colour or pretending they don’t matter, is racism. It’s disgusting.
Clearly it was the black man that forced the white man to round them up, sail them across the seas and sell them as property.
King Leopold the second was just trying to instill a work ethic......
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
The Following User Says Thank You to undercoverbrother For This Useful Post:
In the given circumstances, where Peters may have apologized but not specifically to Aliu, then followed it up with potentially targeting Aliu for demotion due to a personal vendetta and some other bad conduct with the physical abuse, I think the Flames should replace him. I do not see termination with cause as a viable option in this situation and I'm not sure that I think it should be, of course we will see how it plays out.
If there was only the instance of the racist remarks and nothing else, I could envision a scenario where he might be suspended, ordered to undergo sensitivity training and publicly apologize to Aliu and for the comments and be able to remain with the organization.
I guess I should have asked AFC if he was only specifically talking about high profile public positions when it comes to firing someone for past racist conduct or if he meant generally (as I took it). I'm genuinely curious if there are a lot of people that would agree with people being fired with cause for those types of past actions with different organizations. That seems like a bad idea to me, but I'm open to hearing other views.
Depends on the circumstances, I might hire someone who had a known racist past if they had spent ten years going through a journey of self discovery and were open about where they had come from and how they had changed, I wouldn't hire someone who was a proud boy whether they had used the n word or not, I don't want to be around that myself and I am looking after mostly non white kids so that belief structure makes them unable to do the work I need done.
The Flames also have a PR side they have to pay attention too
