Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit. One of the most stupid things I’ve ever done was to tell my boss exactly what I thought – after a bottle or three of shiraz. Was I obnoxious, insulting, and unprofessional? Undoubtedly. Did I mean what I said? Well, yeah, I did.

He was definitely under the influence when he put this together. Photo: AFP

That twee-moustachioed, pint-sized fashion designer, John Galliano, has blamed drugs and booze for a 45 minute tirade in which he maintains a barely controlled wobble while declaring his love for Hitler, saying to a couple of chicks he thought were Jewish:

People like you would be dead. Your mothers, your forefathers, would all be f****ng gassed.

See the video here:

His lawyer says he is neither anti-Semitic, nor racist. But there’s no way alcohol conjured that kind of crap out of thin air. It just retrieved it from the dark recesses of his brain. I call bullshit.

Alcohol melts away your inhibitions, and can make you do things you would never do sober.

Like trying to stagedive during a Clowns of Decadence gig only to realise a) everyone’s at the bar, not in front of the stage and no one’s there to catch you, b) button-down dresses sometimes go wrong when flailing through the air and c) the patterns on the pub’s carpet are there to disguise some really manky stuff that can come off on your face.
But alcohol works to release things that are already within. Little nuggets that your right-thinking mind tends to keep all bottled up. Your innate exhibitionist, or confessional tendencies, or amorous instincts.

After Mel Gibson did his own bit of Jew hating a few years back, Harriet de Wit, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Chicago told the Seattle Times:

What we can say is that alcohol has an effect on inhibitions and that, normally, people will repress certain comments because they are not socially acceptable, but alcohol can take away that inhibition.

Alcohol can make people violent, anti-social, prone to having sex with deeply inappropriate people. It can make you do a lot of things you later regret. Or things you don’t remember. It can probably make you tell some small white lies to achieve the bad sex with the wrong people that you don’t remember.

But it doesn’t make you spontaneously start hating an entire group of people.

It just lets the hate run free.

As for drugs on the other hand – well, psychotropic drugs or nasty shit like ice can do all sorts of things to your head. But Galliano, in true-to-form patheticness, had only had Valium and sleeping pills.

98 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Elphaba says:

      02:01pm | 23/06/11

      Absolutely.  I call bullshit too.

      Your opinions don’t do a complete 180 after you’ve had a few.  You just don’t voice the more controversial ones when sober.

      He is racist and anti-Semitic.  Own what you are.  He’s entitled to his opinion, as am I.  Mel Gibson would be proud.  F*cking idiots, the pair of them.

    • James1 says:

      03:50pm | 23/06/11

      Two from two.  Nicely done.

    • Elphaba says:

      04:13pm | 23/06/11

      I don’t get up as early as Erick, so I have to do it on the afternoon ones… tongue laugh

    • Billy Hill says:

      06:50pm | 23/06/11

      @ Tory ICB,after two or three botties ov red I fall down

    • acotrel says:

      09:27am | 24/06/11

      ‘Alcohol melts away your inhibitions, and can make you do things you would never do sober. ‘

      Alcohol enhances the emotions.  If there is hate and aggression there before you drink, it is likely to come out when you are blasted.  Blaming the alcohol for your own personailty disorder is bullshit!

    • Steve says:

      02:07pm | 23/06/11

      Alcohol doesn’t make anyone a racist or a violent thug or shag someone they don’t want to.  It just lowers the inhibitions that usually stops them. 

      So good call Tory, Galliano is making bullshit claims to avoid responsibility.

    • acotrel says:

      10:28am | 24/06/11

      @Steve
      ‘Alcohol doesn’t make anyone a racist or a violent thug or shag someone they don’t want to. It just lowers the inhibitions that usually stops them. 

      Do you personally live in a social straight jacket? I don’t need inhibitions to stay away from that sort of behaviour, and if I drink I don’t have it me to go there anyway!

    • Bitten says:

      02:08pm | 23/06/11

      Ah yes. People who behave like pigs with a bit of alcohol on board always amuse me when they try to convince the world that they aren’t really like that, it’s just the alcohol talking. Um, no, that’s the real you, sweetheart. Whether you be a bed-hopping dipshit, a foul-mouthed talker, a physical abuser: just because it only happens when you’re drunk doesn’t mean you’re excused, it means that it’s the real ‘you’ coming out to play.

    • Dan says:

      02:21pm | 23/06/11

      ICB on this comment - alcohol is a depressant that often comes wrapped in sugar. The combined effect of alcohol and the crash after the sugar is burnt mean that the person is a much nastier version of themselves. Its got nothing to do with the ‘real you’ - its the worst possible version of you.

      I worked in a pub for 3 years, four nights a week including the weekends. I’ve seen some lovely people turn into complete tools. That wasn’t their “real personality” any more than a stressed out person is showing their “real personality”.

    • Bitten says:

      03:08pm | 23/06/11

      The depressants in the alcohol combine with the burning sugars to….no, seriously, I with you so far Professor.

    • Ando says:

      03:53pm | 23/06/11

      Spot on Bitten.  Dan if turning into a tool means getting messy and loud, thats not what we are talking about. If you mean picking fights and abusing people then they were pretending to be lovely people. If people act like assholes on the drink ,I’m off them.

    • Bev says:

      04:08pm | 23/06/11

      Whether you be a bed-hopping dipshit. because it only happens when you’re drunk doesn’t mean you’re excused. Depends, while many write such things off in the morning “as I was an idiot last night”
      feminism has given women an excuse.  “I was raped”

    • Dan says:

      04:29pm | 23/06/11

      Yeah not a professor obviously Bitten but they do make you do a course on how alcohol affects people before you can work in a pub these days and its pretty interesting how the sugar rush makes people feel great as long as they can keep drinking quickly enough. As soon as they slow down, which they have to eventually, they become tired, grumpy and emotional. We were taught to watch for that moment because it is when you kick them out of the pub.

      @Ando - Yeah I get that and I can understand it - bullying behaviour is hard to forgive and forget, regardless of why. I was referring to the whole lot of it - crying in your beer, being violent, being overly friendly… its usually because the person has no idea what they are doing by that stage. I’m not saying they are not responsible for getting themselves into that state but I just don’t believe that it all comes from a dark vault deep inside them. I think it comes from the amber glass in front of them. But that is why I don’t drink!

    • Bitten says:

      05:07pm | 23/06/11

      Dan, it’s a disinhibitor. It disinhibits consumers. They become disinhibited. Their inhibitions go away. They behave as they truly feel/are. The biochemical reaction by which they get there is irrelevant - it’s their true self.

    • acotrel says:

      10:22am | 24/06/11

      @Dan I lived with a nasty drunk for many years.  While sober he was a lovely person, but he had some emotional issues.  If you touched the nerve, even if he was sober he’d get irritable.  The alcohol enhanced that emotion!  When they got rid of 6 o’clock closing, that was a great day.  The drunks stayed at the pub until after the kids had gone to bed!

    • Dan says:

      02:29pm | 24/06/11

      @ acoltrel - so did I and I loved her deeply. I still do.

    • stockinbingal roo says:

      02:08pm | 23/06/11

      Does this mean that most of the Punch readers are drunk when they write comments?

    • Bitten says:

      02:19pm | 23/06/11

      Sure. We can arrive at that destination if you want.

    • Rover of North Cooma says:

      02:57pm | 23/06/11

      The anonymity of the internet seems to have the same effect as alcohol!

    • acotrel says:

      10:33am | 24/06/11

      @Rover I’m not anonymous on the internet.  It’s easy to find out who I am, and I own my comments.

    • Markus says:

      02:11pm | 23/06/11

      “Alcohol melts away your inhibitions, and can make you do things you would never do sober.”
      Like going out of your way to say and/or do something that you know full well will piss someone off?

      Surely it’s not out of the realms of possibility that what he said while intoxicated was not out of a secretly repressed love of Hitler, but out of a secretly repressed desire to piss all over social convention, that nowadays can sometimes be easily mistaken for the Thought Police.

      ICB on your ICB raspberry

    • melle says:

      02:36pm | 23/06/11

      It’s not out of the realms of possibility

    • TTFN says:

      02:46pm | 23/06/11

      Pssing people off is one of life’s great pleasures…

    • Drunk guy says:

      06:49pm | 23/06/11

      Yeah, . . .listening to the way he was saying it, it wasn’t laced with utter hatred it was sardonic and churlish moreso.  I have had arguements with people from a position i completely reject just for the sake of proving them wrong in public , even though I know they’re not really, but because i can.

    • Spart says:

      07:30pm | 23/06/11

      ICB on Markus

      Galiano didnt just troll, or stir the pot.  He fired off some very ugly, offensive comments. Your mothers should have been gassed? That’s the product of a very disturbed, dark imagination.

    • Elisheva says:

      02:15pm | 23/06/11

      Kol HaKavod Tory, for telling it how it is.

    • Outraged says:

      02:16pm | 23/06/11

      As much as his comments were distasteful, I don’t understand what the lawsuit is about. I don’t think we should throw people in jail for saying controversial statements. We don’t have Thought Police yet.

      He wasn’t inciting violence against all Jews, he was just being a prick. Sadly, that is not a crime.

    • Cloud Strife says:

      02:25pm | 23/06/11

      The thing is, it’s not a ‘controversial statement’. It’s Hate Speech, which *is* illegal, and rightfully so.

      Abusing people because of something they have no control over is just a low, despicable act. It says more about the person doing the abusing than the abusee.

    • Adam Diver says:

      02:32pm | 23/06/11

      There is a lawsuit? For what, being offensive?

      Exactly what is the charge here?

    • Bitten says:

      02:41pm | 23/06/11

      Um, before you make calls on what is or is not a crime, you might care to familiarise yourself with the actual laws of the relevant jurisdiction. He has been charged under French law.

    • Erick says:

      02:48pm | 23/06/11

      “Hate speech” is in the ear of the beholder. Palestinians would regard defence of Israel as “hate speech”. I regard feminism as “hate speech”.

      The honest expression of personal opinion should never be illegal. That’s fascism, which is much worse than mere words.

    • James1 says:

      03:29pm | 23/06/11

      “The honest expression of personal opinion should never be illegal. That’s fascism, which is much worse than mere words.”

      But anti-Semitism and loving Hitler are also symptoms of fascism - now I’m confused.  Does that mean it is fascist not to let this fellow express his inner fascist?  And then, if he does express his inner fascist, isn’t that also fascist?  I guess the crux of what I am asking here is this: isn’t any outcome in this scenario fascist?

    • Cloud Strife says:

      03:33pm | 23/06/11

      @Erick

      Actually, what comes under “Hate Speech” laws is legislated, not in the ‘ear of the beholder’.

      What he said was vile, and I while I think everyone has a right to free speech, this doesn’t mean you (general ‘you’, here) can’t be held accountable when you’re such a miserable excuse for a life form.

    • Bitten says:

      03:45pm | 23/06/11

      @Erick: without doubt the law itself is open to criticism on the grounds you raise. Respectfully however that is a separate issue: the law is how it currently is. Debate over the need to change it or not is free to rage (and would benefit no doubt by consideration of the history of the nation in question in the context of how such a law might have come about). But let’s not get distracted from the inaccuracy of the original statement and the ignorant attitude from which it stems: that the law of my hometown is the only law in the whole wide world.

    • Emma says:

      03:46pm | 23/06/11

      Under French law he can be charged..

      “French law prohibits public insults toward others because of their origins, race or religion.”

    • Bev says:

      03:51pm | 23/06/11

      Cloud Strife says:03:33pm | 23/06/11
      Actually, what comes under “Hate Speech” laws is legislated, not in the ‘ear of the beholder’.

      What is legislated is dependent on who is controling parliament. So yes in the end it does come down to the ear of the beholder. Different party in control different law.  Which is why we should perhaps not pass such legislation and let the court of public opinion decide.

    • Markus says:

      03:56pm | 23/06/11

      So Cloud Strife, the legislation surrounding hate speech specifically states it is illegal to say “People like you would be dead. Your mothers, your forefathers, would all be f****ng gassed”, does it?

      Of course it is in the ear of the beholder. For charges to be laid, somebody who heard it has to have considered it offensive and hateful, and report it to authorities.
      If nobody who hears it considers it offensive and hateful, then how can it be classified as hate speech?

    • Erick says:

      04:02pm | 23/06/11

      @Cloud Strife - what makes you think that French legislation about speech is not in the ear of the beholder? The law is just a brutal suppression of any opinion that the legislators don’t like. And that is fascism.

      Yes, the law is what it is. But the law is wrong, and the law itself is worse than what it prohibits.

    • Tchom says:

      04:07pm | 23/06/11

      I agree with Erick. Anyone can be offended by anything. What he said was stupid, but it wasn’t dangerous. Society should punish him by looking on him with contempt, but he should be arrested for having ideas (however wrong they are)

      Its like comedian Steve Hughes says: It’s not like anything happens to you when your offended. “Someone took the lords name in vain, and when I woke up the next morning, I had leprosy”

    • papachango says:

      04:29pm | 23/06/11

      His comments were distasteful, racist and offensive, and probably illegal under French law, but I agree - provided he wasn’t actually inciting violence I don’t think this should be a crime.
      The trouble with making it illegal to ‘cause offence’ is that it’s a subjective measure, and it has so much wiggle room that free speech will inevitably be compromoised.

      Some oif this anti-vilification stuff is getting ridiculously aribtrary, and certain identity groups have more ‘protection’ than others. We should be getting worried about the rise of soft totalitarianism under the guise of anti-vilification at the Andrew Bolt case, or this even sillier example:
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1380971/Simon-Ledger-arrested-racism-performing-Kung-Fu-Fighting.html

      This is onbiously not to say that I agree with Galliano’s rant - it was idiotic and offensive, but no need to chuck him in jail - just defeat him with counter arguments. He’s done a fair job of beclowning himself anyway.

    • marley says:

      04:48pm | 23/06/11

      Well, if Wiki is anything to go by, France’s hate legislation is very, very broad - and it covers both criminal and civil law, which means you get two kicks at the can against someone who offends you. 

      I do think there’s a place for hate law - when it involves incitement to violence - but the French laws go way beyond that.  And I’m not so worried about what the legislators thought they were doing at the time, as how the judges are interpreting it now.

    • HappyCynic says:

      04:54pm | 23/06/11

      @Erick

      Sure the law’s worse, because insulting people based on their gender, ethnicity or religion is a legitimate way to voice an opinion. /heavy sarcasm

      There are plenty of ways to legitimately criticise someone, telling someone that their parents and grandparents should have been “f**ken gassed” is not one of them. 

      First rule of a debate is to debate the subject not the person.  Sadly this is a long-forgotten skill in an age where every moron gets a voice.  Insulting a person or an entire group of people without any context is never, ever just “voicing an opinion”.

    • Erick says:

      05:07pm | 23/06/11

      @HappyCynic - “First rule of a debate is to debate the subject not the person ... Insulting a person or an entire group of people without any context is never, ever just “voicing an opinion”.”

      Then you should hand yourself in to the police, because most of your comments directed at me have consisted of personal insults and nothing else.

    • Bev says:

      06:38pm | 23/06/11

      Just in. One for free speech.
      A DUTCH court has acquitted right-wing politician Geert Wilders of hate speech charges, saying his anti-Islam statements, while offensive to many Muslims, always fell within the bounds of legitimate political debate.
      Lets hope Bolt is the next cab off the rank, like him or hate him.

    • Spart says:

      07:38pm | 23/06/11

      Erick says: 04:02pm | 23/06/11

      I disagree with the point that you are making.  It was genuine hate speech.

      It wasn’t the usual tired stereotypes that get rolled out. “You’re tight with your money, you hang out in ghettoes, you have long noses etc etc”

      “Your mothers and forefathers should have been gassed” That’s f*cking upsetting, in anyone’s language.

    • Erick says:

      09:30pm | 23/06/11

      @Spart - I think I need to clarify my point a little.

      I can agree with the idea that what Galliano said was hate speech. However, I don’t think hate speech should be illegal. It’s only speech. Those words, while hurtful, are still only words. As long as they don’t directly incite violence, the law should not be involved.

    • John says:

      09:51pm | 23/06/11

      Hate speech is not legitimate, any form of criticism harbor’s resentment, and any form of resent harbors a little hate.

      So if you despise the carbon tax? Can government charge you for hate speech? So if you despise NATO and wish them utter failure in Libya, can the government charge you for hate speech?
      If you despise labor and liberal, is that hate speech?

      Hate speech is anti freedom, anti-democratic and should be up rooted from every western country. Those who push for such laws should be arrested, thrown in jail then expelled for suppression and subversion of a so called called free democratic society

      Hate speech is what it is, censorship and terrorism, terrorizing people not criticize specific people. The worst form of punishment and terrorism in the west is being thrown into jail for a few years, in america, it’s death by lethal injection. But don’t worry! americans have full freedom of speech! There’s no hate speech laws in their country’s, as it banned from the constitution, don’t expect lethal injection for committing hate speech in america, because hate speech laws in america are against the law! American constitution forbids hate speech laws.

      It’s amazing isn’t it! one’s law is a crime in another one’s country.

      I’m sure obama the Lenin lover would like to change this!

    • Pete says:

      08:02am | 24/06/11

      I think Erick is defending the right of a person to say what they feel no matter how bitter ,hateful or vengeful it sounds to the audience and that laws should not be allowed to impinge on the right of the person to say it. 
      Freedom of speech.  Erick believes it wont affect the audience, “it’s just speech”, sort of like the nurmberg rallies, kristal nacht. those events were just speech and the result of listening to it.  On the whole, society allows people to voice their opinions to a point.  I mean Erick speaks frequently of his dislike of the family law courts and the fact that he feels that men get dudded by the outcomes in family law courts.  Isn’t he lucky he can do that, because the discussions are kept within boundaries that are acceptable. something Mr Galliano failed to do and now is trying to deflect responsibility by rolling out the usual excuses.  He said it for a protracted period of time, he’s responsible for what he said.

    • marley says:

      08:21am | 24/06/11

      @John - America does in fact have hate crime laws, but I believe they relate mostly to inciting violence.  I don’t have a problem with that at all.  I do have a problem with the concept that people should be punished for speech which is offensive but not violent.

    • kirsty says:

      02:32pm | 23/06/11

      Tory, please say your examples A, B and C all happened to you at the one time?  I think it makes for an excellent story.

    • Tory Shepherd

      Tory Shepherd says:

      03:17pm | 23/06/11

      Yes, and in order. Oh, I mean - to a friend of mine.

    • DY says:

      02:35pm | 23/06/11

      We should get Tony Abbott and Julia Guillard drunk. That would be interesting

    • dudeman says:

      02:55pm | 23/06/11

      I thought Gillard was drunk all the time? You mean this is her acting rationally and sober, gtfo no way dude

    • Richard M says:

      03:41pm | 23/06/11

      What a shame.  I thought we might actually get through one stream on this site without any stupid and puerile abuse of the PM. No such luck.

    • DY says:

      04:21pm | 23/06/11

      Poor Richard M cant get his way

    • Robert Smissen of country SA says:

      11:44pm | 23/06/11

      @richard, I’d queue for 4 hours in the rain to abuse Julia gillard & please explain why you think that abusing Gillard is puerile? ?

    • Chris says:

      02:39pm | 23/06/11

      WOW, Clowns of Decandence concert, was it at the Flinders Uni refrectory or the Kent Town hotel. Loved the Clowns, great Adelaide band.

      I wonder what they are all doing now???

    • Tory Shepherd

      Tory Shepherd says:

      03:18pm | 23/06/11

      Adelaide Uni bar, Chris wink

      I reckon it was the gig before the one they set it on fire. When firebreathing goes wrong!

      Not that I was there. As I said, it was a friend of mine.

    • Chris says:

      03:44pm | 23/06/11

      Ha ha ha, great gig, I think I remember being there in my younger days. I reckon they were playing with Def FX.

      I still cant believe they fitted into a corner of the Kent Town hotel on a Thursday night.

      I will have to dig out Kamikaze Carnival from the pile at home, from this reminder.

      Not that this has anything to do with the topic of your article, ummm Yes racism bad and John Galliano bad. What surprises me is how society just offer excuses for bad behaviour, and there’s plenty of examples of the recent, I did this because, “I’m addicted” I’m depressed” I’m this” I’m that” there seems to be a propensity for people to fail to take responsibility for their actions and unfortunately that is supported through court decision, which then snow balls on “ I Robbed this place because I was’ I assaulted someone because, because because because.

    • josh says:

      02:39pm | 23/06/11

      Uh oh, never ever insult the protected people - you must think only positive thoughts about them.

    • James1 says:

      03:37pm | 23/06/11

      I think, along the specrum where 1 is “think positive thoughts” and 10 is “insult people”, saying that someone’s parents and grandparents should have been “f**king gassed” scores about 50.

    • Outraged says:

      04:04pm | 23/06/11

      James1: Sarah Palin was subject to the most vitriol of anyone I have ever seen. She was constantly called a “Dumb bitch”, people in America hung noose effigys of her outside their doors on Halloween, Sandra Bernhardt said Sarah Palin should be gang-raped by black men…yet no-one thinks they should be jailed. Too bad Palin wasn’t Jewish…

    • James1 says:

      04:20pm | 23/06/11

      Indeed it is too bad.  It is also too bad that her ancestors didn’t have one of the most advanced nations systematically try to murder every single one of them.  It is also too bad that her ancestors didn’t find themselves being persecuted relentlessly for thousands of years, many, many miles from their homeland.  Too bad they were attacking her as an individual, on the basis of her actions and views, rather than simply for having the temerity to have a Jewish mother.

      I am not defending the things said about Sarah Palin - there are too many legitimate policy-related reasons to attack her to resort to stupid childish insults.  But if you can’t see the difference between horrible, inexcusable things said about an individual, and advocating the resumption of a genocide against an entire ethnicity, then too bad for you as well.

    • Gladys says:

      03:00pm | 23/06/11

      I’m not sure I really care. He’s just a hateful little man with tiny carnie hands.

    • Fiona says:

      11:10pm | 23/06/11

      His weird little girl hairstyles disturb me the most.

    • Drew(Darlinghurst) says:

      03:19pm | 23/06/11

      Good Article.

      What I found interesting in this saga was that John Galliano designed the frock of this years Israeli contestant in the 2011 Eurovision Song Contest.

      The one, the only Dana International ( A fabulous Transgender Singer)

      Talk about PR Stunt.

    • Drew(Darlinghurst) says:

      03:19pm | 23/06/11

      Good Article.

      What I found interesting in this saga was that John Galliano designed the frock of this years Israeli contestant in the 2011 Eurovision Song Contest.

      The one, the only Dana International ( A fabulous Transgender Singer)

      Talk about PR Stunt.

    • Not a Catholic says:

      03:51pm | 23/06/11

      Eurovision. Well. Only a fringe dwelling lefty homosexual would know that little gem of information now wouldn’t they Drew?

      You’re right. Its really interesting.

    • bella starkey says:

      04:39pm | 23/06/11

      I knew that and I am neither fringe dwelling (well I have a fringe but i don’t live in it, son’t judge me for my bangs!) or homosexual.

      He also designed the one she wore when she won a few years back.

    • Satorial Stan says:

      03:23pm | 23/06/11

      You can say what you want about the Nazis but they were always very snappy dressers.

    • Geoff - Brisbane says:

      03:30pm | 23/06/11

      I’m not sure if it works for all situations, Tory. I always remember one guy calling a Brisbane radio station claiming he went home drunk and ordered 6 coffee machines off the TV (buy one get one free) and ended up with 12 coffee machines.

      Surely he wasn’t admiring coffee machines before that night and been dreaming of how 12 coffee machines would greatly increase his quality of life.

      Also I doubt the guy down at the pub getting carried home by his mates truely loves them and wants to marry them,  because they dragged his ass home.

      But you are quite correct on controversial issues like racism and what not that a drunk tongue speaks a sober mind.

    • Badwolf says:

      03:49pm | 23/06/11

      Racists are the scapegoats of the modern era. They are the goldstiens of 1984, they are the snowball’s of animal farm. They are the ones we can channel all our hate and fears at.
      They are like sin in the medieval era, sex in Victorian era, and the communism during the cold war.
      It is that which is seen as something that needs to be purged in order to sanctify us.
      It is the original sin of the modern age.

    • Markus says:

      04:15pm | 23/06/11

      Imagine if people with arachnophobia or agoraphobia were treated with the complete and utter vitriol that those with xenophobia or homophobia receive from the public, even those that go out of their way to ensure their phobia does not impact anyone else in any way.

    • James1 says:

      04:37pm | 23/06/11

      Unlike sin in the Middle Ages (or any time, really - no god=no sin) and sex in Victorian England (too many undergarments in the way), anti-Semitism is real.  There is nothing wrong with opposing it.

    • John says:

      06:43pm | 23/06/11

      Markus

      So the Palestinians have a mental illness for being critical of the Zionist state? They must be treated for this?

    • mike j says:

      05:01pm | 24/06/11

      Anti-Semitism is real, James1, but so is Zionist victimhood and entitlement.

      Thanks for demonstrating.

    • Smacko says:

      03:50pm | 23/06/11

      I think everyone should be able to express their opinions without being charged with an offence. And id someone should offend you, then just punch them in the mouth. Of course, you might get charged with an offence…

    • Crypt OG Raphael says:

      03:59pm | 23/06/11

      Even though going down on the pub’s carpet would presume Snatcher’d declined the opportunity to break with the chorus and/or humpty diver’s autumninal indifference…

      Perhaps a glance toward the bar would have revealed Carrie-Ann’s Natalie polishing a pythonesque grail sleeked in diesel and sprinkled with fairy dust.

      If only the subjects name were Midori then the objections wood have both melon and pussy as lynx to Mind Altering substances… just like the tory tony…

    • Mark says:

      04:08pm | 23/06/11

      Maybe the booze let the inner racist out or maybe it let the inner tool out. Did he say those things because he believed them or because he wanted to hurt the people he was saying them too? Alcohol lowers inhibitions but lies may be the result instead of the truth.

      All of us have a dark side & nobody but a total nutter has completely consistent beliefs. Horrid thing to say, but unless he was trying to promote the mass killing of people, should not be illegal.

    • Gran Depine says:

      04:41pm | 23/06/11

      Greek phrase “?? ???? ???????” , in wine there is truth.
      Stop blaming the wine.

    • cicero says:

      07:01pm | 23/06/11

      latin

      in vino veritas

    • Jasper says:

      07:03pm | 23/06/11

      The Latin version (much better known and a hell of a lot easier to say than the Greek) of the phrase “in vino veritas”

      But I’m in 2 minds about this. I do have more than a little sympathy with the idea that there is no human right to not be offended.

      At the same time, most European countries have very, um, rambunctious histories of political unrest. Pogroms, political lynchings (such as the de Witt’s in Dutch Republic), mass expulsions of religious groups and even bloody revolutions have all been kicked off by someone saying:

      Everything is “their” fault, let’s put them to the sword

      Looking at the amount of political violence in European history, I think they have reasonable right to prevent those who hold racist views from inciting hatred.

      As was said above, there is an enormous difference between “horrible, inexcusable things said about an individual, and advocating the resumption of a genocide against an entire ethnicity”.

    • marley says:

      08:26am | 24/06/11

      @Jasper - “Everything is “their” fault, let’s put them to the sword.”  -

      The first part of that statement should be allowed under free speech principles; it’s the second part that’s the problem - the incitement to violence aspect.  Even the US won’t allow that.  I have no problem with charging someone for inciting violence against a group or against an individual on the basis of his membership in a group, but I do have a problem with charging someone for just being a bigoted, offensive idiot when there’s no violence involved.

    • jag says:

      04:49pm | 23/06/11

      Someone should have just punched the little runt in the face. That would have solved everything.

    • Seano says:

      05:54pm | 23/06/11

      Who Hitler?

    • Graeme says:

      04:55pm | 23/06/11

      I tend to believe the guy.  If he was that ingrained a racist why would he be dining in the Jewish quarter of the city?

      Tory you left the silly hat out of your calculations.  Any person would point out its foolishness, Jewish or otherwise.  My guess is he returned an insult, being as offensive as his befuddled brain could manage.  He sounded really pissed, so I am not surprised that was the most offensive thing he could think of.  Hardly an excuse though.

    • Harquebus says:

      06:00pm | 23/06/11

      Congratulations. You are also stupid enough to put a Flashy black box in the middle of your webpage. Seeya.

    • The Liberal Loafer says:

      06:28pm | 23/06/11

      truth syrup is a laxative for politicians and welfare recipients.

    • The Liberal Loafer says:

      06:31pm | 23/06/11

      The Veritas wrote without fear or favor in the old Sunday Mirror. He had naked eyes! Or Bette Davis Eyes!

    • Drunk guy says:

      06:53pm | 23/06/11

      BTW, . . . . OMG, you actually face planted the mosh pit carpet,. . ewwwwee.
      i hope you let the kids kiss the other cheek.

    • John says:

      07:02pm | 23/06/11

      The french are committing a holocaust in Libya as we speak, the french response to this is drinking coffee with mental manic’s.

    • wolfie says:

      08:32pm | 23/06/11

      It’s unfortunate but in today’s Europe one particular version of history regarding WW2 has been determined to be the only one, the only correct one which which must be followed without question .
      It is strictly forbidden to question it, even aspects of it even if you can provide credible proof. It is forbidden to think about it , it is forbidden to ask questions and it is forbidden to talk about it unless you fully agree with it. Many have lingered in prison for up to five years because they had credible proof that the gassings, for example, are a hoax. Even with scientific proof the subject is forbidden from being discussed or explored unless you come to the conclusion that what is written is the holy truth.
      I have no idea what the truth is but I am forbidden through the law to ask uncomfortable questions.  . as a young impressionable youth I believed everything but after realizing that some aspects are impossibly true I began exploring and found that this aspect in history is a taboo subject to be investigated . Believe it or go to prison!
      I am quite certain that if Galliano began insulting Christ or Zarathustra we wouldn’t know about it.
      Today this ridiculous situation will continue to dumb us down , to believe what you’re told or you simply will be dragged before a court where you are not allowed to defend yourself.

    • Seano says:

      09:28pm | 23/06/11

      But you can’t provide credible proof. All you can do it is post vague rants on blogs.

    • wolfie says:

      10:12pm | 23/06/11

      Seano, can you?
      Resorting to personal insults shows me that you do not have an argument.
      Apart from that there is plenty of credible proof. Do the work and do your own research.

    • Seano says:

      05:47am | 24/06/11

      You’re the one claiming that accepted historical fact is a lie. Therefore you need to put up or shut up.

      If you feel insulted then perhaps you should considering the insult you have posted to millions of murdered people.

      http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar01.html

    • stephen says:

      11:26pm | 23/06/11

      Jews should not call people nazis either, especially when they are not.
      And as they were not drunk, doped or stupid when they said these things,(or so I’m told to a friend of mine) then why should they be excused, but Galliano is not ?
      Is a nazi worse than a Jew ? (Even a dirty one.)
      Supposedly.
      Then why the reverse indignation over a matter which apparently is an Historical insult, (but only one way ?)

      Jews can be as guilty of racism as anyone else, (and to me, they have been).
      History teaches us nothing.
      It’s only personal safety,( which is at stake) that can make the difference.

    • Pete says:

      07:44am | 24/06/11

      ICB.  Why do people always say they “behaved like pigs” or they “behaved like animals”  Sorry, I have never seen a pig or an animal behave as badly as we do,  more appropriate to say “they behaved like humans”

    • mike j says:

      12:11pm | 24/06/11

      “alcohol has an effect on inhibitions and that, normally, people will repress certain comments because they are not socially acceptable”

      Why do people constantly interpret this as meaning alcohol is some kind of magical truth serum? I say socially unacceptable things all the time; only a fool would believe that I mean them all.

      You’re just confused again, Tory. You know Johnny Depp isn’t really a pirate, right?

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

I’d like to be able to say that sharing the world’s largest radio telescope with South Africa…

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

When North Queensland Liberal MP George Christensen got the idea of launching a new political organisation…

Please enter your password

Please enter your password

Help! I’ve succumbed to a crippling modern illness that can strike at any moment. Symptoms include:…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter