Bill Peters' open apology to Treliving. UPD: Aliu responds

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Aleks

I'm from Three Hills, I've seen this brought up a few times in this whole thing, and it irks me. I have no ties to the town anymore, but it's not some backwoods redneck racists hot cell. Sure there's farmers, sure there's a large religious sect, but that narrative has to stop

What narrative? That in the past racism was more prevalent everywhere across Canada and there is a likelyhood that some/most rural areas were likely not the first movers in the fight against racism and the changes in society in those regions? Just my opinion. I wasn't alive before 79.

Where I grew up, a prairie city of a couple hundred thousand, probably had significant racist views when my dad was born in 52 and still when Bill Peters was born in the 60s. Would it surprise me if it was still experienced there today? Not one bit.

Maybe you know every single person that was around Bill his entire upbringing and can vouch that there wasn't racism?

Anyway, the comment is about the history, not the state today.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Sometimes you gotta ask yourself why the conversation went down that tangent in the first place, and how relevant it is to the topic at hand.

It's not relevant, that's the whole reason I said not to talk about that nonsense.

But ya, this thread is just a juvenile disaster haha

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don't know exactly what it looks like. But I've seen plenty of executive contracts, including in this context. There's a good argument that his past actions hurt the Flames. But that's not really the contractual question. Morals clauses are read very restrictively to begin with. I've never seen one that would allow for a ten year old event to constitute the type of bad behavior which would void a contract like this. So IMO it's not impossible, just really really unlikely.

What about the physical abuse in Carolina? That was only 3-5 years ago.

[Phaneuf_Phan]

Is OK for rappers to drop the n word multiple times in a 'song'? Is it OK for employees to play that kind of 'music' at their work for all co-workers to hear? Would it be acceptable in an NHL locker room today? 10 years ago?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf_Phan

Is OK for rappers to drop the n word multiple times in a 'song'? Is it OK for employees to play that kind of 'music' at their work for all co-workers to hear? Would it be acceptable in an NHL locker room today? 10 years ago?

a. Yes. And it's a song, not a "song".
b. No.
c. Depends on the team concensus, and what the coach allows.
d. Ditto.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by cannon7

So it warrants more barbarity? Eye for an eye and all that?

No, but the idea that a you can draw a parallel between the systemic abuse and killing of Africans in both Africa and the US for the past four centuries, and act of depravity that slaughtered tens of millions for no better reason than to make money out of them like livestock, to this day still effects the survivors and the unfortunate but somewhat understandable anger of the Black population in South Africa who still live in poverty while the minority white population lives a wealthy life continuing to take advantage of the stolen land they still live on.

I can understand why they aren't to happy with the white population, not morally right but understandable

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Makarov

You might consider whether or not it says something about your posting history when you feel the need to explicitly confirm that "I was against apartheid".

[is joke, relax]

Tis true. But we do live in a time where saying "murdering white South African farmers for their land is bad" could be called a "racist diatribe of the privileged something something...."

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by cannon7

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.

The bolded part is simply not true

The claim of a white genocide in South Africa has been promoted by right-wing groups in South Africa and the United States and is a frequent talking point among white nationalists.[18][19][20][21][22] There are no reliable figures that suggest that white farmers are at greater risk of being killed than the average South African

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_...White_genocide

It is pretty well documented that this tripe is stuff that is spread by white nationalists/white supremacists. It is not actually happening.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf_Phan

Is OK for rappers to drop the n word multiple times in a 'song'? Is it OK for employees to play that kind of 'music' at their work for all co-workers to hear? Would it be acceptable in an NHL locker room today? 10 years ago?

Yes. Black people can say it. If you don't understand why, spend a little time on Wikipedia. Better yet, talk to a black person about it.

And yes, of course rap music can be played in the locker room.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf_Phan

Is OK for rappers to drop the n word multiple times in a 'song'? Is it OK for employees to play that kind of 'music' at their work for all co-workers to hear? Would it be acceptable in an NHL locker room today? 10 years ago?

Think your missing the point here. In no way is it ever acceptable for a member of management on a professional sports team to say the N Word. You don't think the music is appropriate use those exact words not the N word. It is also not acceptable to physically assault a player which happened in his last assignment which seems to be being swept under the rug.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

What about the physical abuse in Carolina? That was only 3-5 years ago.

Probably the same, unfortunately. Contracts can only contemplate so much. It's not a matter of right and wrong in these cases. It's what's on the paper that counts.

This incident might change the way the contracts are drafted.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don't know exactly what it looks like. But I've seen plenty of executive contracts, including in this context. There's a good argument that his past actions hurt the Flames. But that's not really the contractual question. Morals clauses are read very restrictively to begin with. I've never seen one that would allow for a ten year old event to constitute the type of bad behavior which would void a contract like this. So IMO it's not impossible, just really really unlikely.

Yeah, even if it's in his contract it would be tough to enforce. The Flames are probably going to have to pay him to go away.

[shogged]

Shout out to everyone who still has the patience to tackle the apologists on this board so soon after the cherry thread.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by stone hands

you can

a) not be a truly racist hateful person

AND

b) say racist things that can get you fired

you dont have to be a cross burning klan member to say insensitive things that will get you fired

technically

a) not be a truly racist hateful person

AND

b) say racist things that can get you fired

AND

c) say racist things that can get you fired from a different workplace a decade later

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by 81MC

I guess we have to disagree here. Referring to a thing as a thing, to me, appropriate. In this case, the thing was ‘######’ use in a song. I can’t imagine ever quoting a piece of art and changing the word because I’m uncomfortable with it.

Likely people do (again, I personally have had it said to me). But this is in no way what is at question here. I don’t believe whether ###### was actually being said in the songs is even at debate here

No, I was not there or do I know the facts for it to have any effect on my opinion of Peters. Allowing a word, in and of itself, to be forbidden regardless of context or the issue at hand is asinine.

He never called it ‘###### music’. The difference is, to me, quite clear. ‘###### ####’ when referring to music that’s full of ‘######’ is pretty clearly directed at the lyrical content. If he did refer to it as ‘###### music’, that’s something all together different.

Again, I think this distinction is much more than trivial. The nuance of the use in this case is incredibly important to consider.

Sure, be outraged that someone said the word. But ignore context? That’s whack.

Just want to say a couple of things. Thanks to the input of another poster, I recognize that there may be very specific circumstances where a person might sincerely use the word "n#####" during a conversation in which that person was trying to communicate how hurtful and offensive that word can be. However, in my view, this type of sincere use of the word could only take place in the closest, most trusting type of relationship (for example, immediate family). That was certainly not the case with Peters and Aliu.

And I agree with you completely that context is vitally important. I'm not trying to ignore the context of the incident at all (far from it). I just don't think the context of this incident supports the narrative that you are proposing.

[Tron_fdc]

I'm curious if there is any other case where an NHL team has terminated a coach with cause and no pay? We all throw around the term "fired the coach" but it's not really a firing; it's more so "bought out" than terminated. Terminated to me means fired with cause, no pay.

Pretty sure Burke said last night this is uncharted territory.

[Vansmack]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

totally disagree.
Peters did this on his own, with consultation from his people.

That's how i took it when Tre spoke with the media after the game last night. He said Bill sent it to the media... and we received a copy slightly before.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Tis true. But we do live in a time where saying "murdering white South African farmers for their land is bad" could be called a "racist diatribe of the privileged something something...."

I don't think that is really true though? I'll test it out:

Just to be clear, I think murdering white South African farmers for their land is really bad.

It doesn't really have much to do with Bill Peters though (well, unless new allegations surface that he murdered a white South African farmer for his or her land).

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The bolded part is simply not true




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_...White_genocide

It is pretty well documented that this tripe is stuff that is spread by white nationalists/white supremacists. It is not actually happening.

See? LOL.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Tis true. But we do live in a time where saying "murdering white South African farmers for their land is bad" could be called a "racist diatribe of the privileged something something...."

Yeah, because it's made up and a dog whistle for racist #### heads.