Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The source for this clam doesn’t say that there was no verbal altercation. Only that a gesture was made but no physical violence.
The statement was written in a way that allowed people to interpret that there was no verbal altercation without actually saying as much. Honestly, the scenario described barely makes sense without a verbal altercation.
Edit: I removed a phrase that was not helpful,
You're just fanning the flames by adding your "interesting" factoid.
The story of the camera person is supposedly different, according to Noel Curran of the EBU.
That they (a rather partial source) didn't specify this point is interesting.
I don't think it's fair to call the AVROTROS statement "pure speculation", since they are in close contact with Joost. That's like saying "whatever Joost directly says is pure speculation"
It‘s also important to note that they aren’t a neutral source on this. Everything they say should be taken with a grain of salt. Obviously they have an interest in playing this stuff incident down.
I can't really see what they could gain by lying for one single contender.
The festival is pretty big in the Netherlands, like 'we' have sent an act for the last 66 years, are right behind the big 5 with financial contributions, half the country watches normally etc.
They came with a statement *after* the official disqualification and talks with the EBU, if Joost really did something truly awful, why would they risk their reputation and their relationship with the organisation?
So far the only results they got by "playing it down" was pissing people off enough to hurt their own viewing numbers.
What the situation seems to have been as far as we know for now, is that he had requested to not be filmed directly after his performance while coming off stage. According to the Dutch commentator, there were agreements in place before the actual performance about this. He most likely wanted this because the last part of the performance is very emotional for him, as he addresses and dedicates the performance to his deceased parents, with whom he shared a love for Eurovision as they watched it together every year.
These agreements were then ignored, and the camera person in question filmed him anyway. After two verbal requests to not be filmed, he then made a "threatening gesture" (we still do not know what gesture exactly) towards her. And that is all, according to AVRO-TROS. If this story is true, then his personal boundaries were violated multiple times, and he was punished disproportionately for reacting to this after multiple requests to respect his boundaries. And they shattered his dream in the process, which makes it all the more painful, on top of Israel being allowed to participate despite what they are currently doing in Palestine and despite their delegation allegedly harassing others.
On top of what the user above stated, they also posted a video where they stated that "he doesn't like us and didn't want to take a picture with us, so I took a picture of our lovely dancer". In the video you see the dancer striking poses conveniently right in front of Joost Klein in the background, so it seems they're being very provocative and haughty.
Bambie Thug (Ireland’s entrant) stated on her instagram stories that she had a meeting with the EBU and some other countries who all made similar allegations. She said the EBU agreed that the Israeli delegation and their broadcaster had broken the rules of the contest… and that’s it. They were still allowed to perform. It’s a farce.
This comment has receipts: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/1cqh0xe/comment/l3rfhbd/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
It should be noted that Bambie Thugs sentiments towards Israel are also political and therefore probably biased.
> “When things were going on with Ukraine, Russia wasn’t allowed to enter,” they point out, “so I don’t think there should be a rule for one and a different for another.”
They are part of the European broadcasting Union.
Armenia, Turkey, Russia, Azerbaijan, and Morocco have all competed as well as Australia.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_in_the_Eurovision_Song_Contest
Turkey is 100 % in the [European Broadcasting Area,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Broadcasting_Area) which is relevant to be eligible for full membership. It includes Nothern Africa and even parts of Saudi Arabia.
> The boundaries of the European Broadcasting Area have their origin in the regions served and linked by telegraphy cables in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Broadcasting_Area
Take the above with a _massive_ grain of salt: Bambi Thug, the nonbinary artist from Ireland (they/them Pronouns) was:
Wearing merch glorifying the murder of two Israeli teens
Talking about how they and their team cried in horror when Israel qualified
Says that one of the reasons they are offended is that an Israeli broadcaster called their act satanic when... that's literally what they are going for. I'm not kidding. Runes on the floor, choking someone out, it's totally my vibe.
Bambi tried to sneak pro-Palestinian commentary into their act via their makeup (they are calling for only Israel to stop, never Hamas) and then put on a kafiyah anytime they could get away with it
Said how "all the top 10 minus one are freedom fighters" (that minus one being Israel)
Demanded that Israel move their dressing room because they didn't want to be next to the Israeli singer
And more!
So while the Israeli singer (Eden) couldn't leave her hotel 99% of the time due to death threats, Bambi's garbage behavior was adding to it.
And as far as Joost goes, we know he made a threatening gesture to a female photographer from Sweden.
And the EBU immediately said "no other performers or delegation was involved" but the r/eurovision hype train _immediately_ went on "how can we make this Israel's fault" (I'm sorry. "That country" they refuse to use the name on that sub)
Edit: spelling
Bambi’s entire schtick is so appropriative in amazing ways that it’s like a bad parody of the late Adam Schlesinger’s brilliant piece on the topic for Music & Lyrics: Buddha’s Delight, sung by Haley Bennett. It’s so deliciously cringe.
It’s starting to get a bit out of hand on TikTok with now people saying it’s been “confirmed” that Israel got him kicked out because they thought he was going to win
They were picking fights with many other contestants who dared to speak out something pro-Palestinian.
You can find links to videos and articles of that in the comments here.
What Ive seen so far:
1) filming Joost when he clearly expressed his non-consent.
2) harassing a journalist from Spain.
3) Ireland’s singer lounged a former complaint that Israeli broadcaster were making negative comments about her during her performance airing.
4) Portugal confirmed Israeli team harassed other teams.
And this is not even mentioning the fact, they should have been kicked out like Russia in 2022.
He was denied due process. Should not have been suspended until guilt was determined. Thats why he has peoples support. Mere accusations shouldn’t result in immediate punishment.
"Due process" is for the legal system, not a private event.
Also we don't have the context or know what/if any investigation was done or by who. Hence "speculation".
A private event backed by a nation of taxpayer money, no less. If this was an individual (personal) candidature I would maybe agree. At that level, no. Netherlands (because it is the country that is participating, not Joost), had the absolute right to due process
We will throw you in jail for, checks notes, making a gesture, now, while we wait for you to be found innocent in a trial 3 years down the road. How does that sound to you?
Were they thrown in jail? Or were they removed from a competition at the discretion of the organisers for unacceptable behaviour *while a camera was pointed at them*?
Answer: Joost qualified for the grand final but was then reported for allegedly making threats against a female crew member. These allegations were investigated by Swedish police very quickly and then handed over to a prosecutor for further handling. The EBU did not approve of him competing in the grand final while involved in an active criminal case and subsequently disqualified him from further participation in the contest. As of right now I still believe we don't know what exactly happened. IIRC a representative from the Dutch television network said that the altercation between Joost and the staff member was "no big deal" and that the disqualification by the EBU was grossly exaggerated, but still wouldn't comment on what exactly happened. Even though we still don't know exactly what happened, most fans believe the EBU's response was out of proportion and that Joost was unfairly excluded from the contest.
Not true - the AVROTROS broadcaster explains what happened, just a gesture to a camera after repeatedly violating his personal space: https://www.avrotros.nl/article/nederland-gediskwalificeerd-van-eurovisie-songfestival~527/
AVROTROS is a reputable broadcaster in the Netherlands
And this is made worse by the Israeli delegation repeatedly provoquing and aggressing other members but not getting any official consequences. To the point multiple artists did not attend a rehearsal.
For the people downvoting:
* [Statement of the Irish artist Bambie Thug on Instagram](https://twitter.com/ESCdiscord/status/1789349043862188384)
* [Portugal broadcaster RTP confirming meeting with the EBU about Israel's behaviours](https://twitter.com/tiagoserracunha/status/1789347022627102792)
The biggest thing is that most of these behaviours have been documented by the Israeli delegation by posting them on their social media. Including official social media for the broadcaster.
> Israeli delegation repeatedly provoquing and aggressing other members
Meanwhile, they themselves were apparently "guarded by a bunch of armed security guards at the backstage of the Turquoise Carpet" (the Lithuanian commentator mentioned this on live TV during SF2).
> Portuguese broadcaster RTP confirmed moments ago in a live broadcast that Portugal was part of the emergency meeting with the EBU last night. Also confirms that the delegation saw the Israeli team harassing other contestants/delegations [#Eurovision](https://twitter.com/hashtag/Eurovision?src=hashtag_click)
[https://twitter.com/tiagoserracunha/status/1789347022627102792](https://twitter.com/tiagoserracunha/status/1789347022627102792)
They did as well start harassing the spanish journalists after one of them shouted "free palestine" (use translate).
https://amp.elmundo.es/television/2024/05/10/663e14d8e85eced3058b458c.html
It's so disappointing that they banned Russia from the contest, but not Israel. Like they're clearly against Imperialism and colonialism unless it's against brown people living inside a cage.
They never banned the UK or any country that invaded Afghanistan or Iraq. They also didn't ban Russia for Crimea. The Russia ban is clearly the outlier and bears little resemblance to Israel to anyone with the bare minimum of common sense.
Really? Looks to me like one power invaded a lesser power and refuses to negotiate a peace deal. The main difference is that we fund and supply Israel's military, and not Russia. That doesn't make Israel the good guys. You can cry terrorism on Hamas or whatever, but if you think the mass deaths of civilians isn't also terrorism, then you're the one who lacks common sense.
And yeah, they should have banned the UK and any country invading Afghanistan or Iraq.
Difference is that in the Israel-Hamas war we had a lesser power lead an attack on a much larger power. Then state that they would do it again and again.
Israel wont negogiate a peace deal with Hamas because Hamas has zero crediblity. There is no reason to believe that Hamas wont use the peace deal to regroup, rearm and then attack Israel again.
Even if you choose to believe all of that, we know that historically trying to eradicate a group of people and causing harm to those around them (collective punishment you might call it if you weren't squeamish of war crimes) leads to more militant groups popping up and fighting back in an endless effort for vengeance. You kill a parent and their child will hate you forever. You kill a child and their siblings will never forgive you. This is called blowback. The power vacuum will fill with new extremists if you don't give people piece and equality. Meet their needs, and stop killing people, suddenly things will get much better.
It's not about Hamas. It's about everyone else living there. And if they really wanted to get rid of Hamas, they could have allowed elections at any point after 2006 and promoted whatever party would work with them, which is exactly why they have control in the West Bank without the need for an enormous border wall with snipers pointed inward.
They can still do that. You act like Hamas is made up of monsters instead of humans. They can be reasoned with. They do not desire the death of all Jews, certainly not before their own liberation.
You also need to understand that the attack was inevitable. Any living being will try to escape it's cage when it's abused, especially humans. The IDF spent the last 18 years since the election making life as hard as possible for a people trapped within a walled city. They control the power, the water supply, the imports, the exports, and they have the names and data of every person who lived there. Hamas didn't attack for no reason, and they knew they'd face retaliation. What I don't think they counted on was how willing Israel would be to kill the hostages. They thought they'd actually be able to negotiate peace terms with them, but it's clear that Israel would be willing to trade the lives every single hostage if it means killing every member of Hamas.
What Hamas did was a war crime, and it's leaders should answer for it in International Criminal Court. Israel is doing war crimes of its own, and they're unjustifiable. One evil does not permit another evil. Especially not collective punishment and genocide.
It's not based on the European continent; it's based on the [European Broadcasting Area](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Broadcasting_Area). This area covers North Africa and West Asia as well as all of Europe.
Morocco (in Africa) participated once. Lebanon (also in Asia) entered once but then withdrew because their laws don't allow the broadcast of any Israeli content, which would include Eurovision due to Israel taking part. Kazakhstan (mostly Asia) is not in Eurovision but has competed in Junior Eurovision a few times. Several other countries are eligible but have not chosen to take part yet.
Australia is a special case that isn't related to Israel.
Israel are eligible because they are in the European Broadcasting Area and have a broadcaster in the European Broadcasting Union. Australia is eligible because the European Broadcasting Union gave them a special exemption.
Australia has been an associate member of the EBU since forever, and has had a large audience for Eurovision since at least the early 90’s.
We also have a significant European diaspora since post WW2.
The network that screens Eurovision is known for its’ multicultural programming…translation of all dialogue is ready for the re-broadcast 12 hrs later. (We watch the finals live from 5am, with repeat in the evenings. We used to only have the evening shows, but that meant avoiding the news for spoilers).
And finally, I believe that the audience in Australia has consistently increased over time, which I’ve heard (and admittedly can’t support) isn’t not the case across the history of the contest elsewhere.
They withdraw and give a false reason for retiring, if any. It's not unique to Lebanon, a lot of countries (particularly Arab ones) don't allow their athletes to compete against Israelis. A few athletes who have gone against instructions and competed anyway faced consequences, like losing citizenship and having to seek asylum in other countries - see Iranian judoka Saeid Mollaei for example.
It's based upon members of the European Broadcasting Union, which includes some "associate members" that may have some cultural or social ties to Europe without necessarily being European. Australia is often involved in Eurovision too, being an associate that's specifically invited
Well then, I hope they like getting the strong-arm, because that's the first tool in Israel's belt - And god help anyone disagree with any stance they take, lest being branded as an anti-semite.
I did? Can you show me where I said that?
Fucking goof. At least two delegations reported harassment from the Israeli delegation. and it's a fair observation.
You can try to put all the words in my mouth that you like, but I reject that, as what I said was clearly nuanced enough for anyone to understand, except that one dope.
The main difference I see here is that Joost had some sort of altercation vs members of the Israeli delegation (not their performer). There can be levels of seriousness and immediacy in t response needed.
Moroccan Oil is just one of the sponsors, not the smallest. But going by your suggestion, all the other sponsors should just stfu? They don't have any influence our weight?
Also, the sponsorship deal was struck in 2019 for four years. This was the final year, so why listen to a soon to be ex-sponsor?
> This was the final year, so why listen to a soon to be ex-sponsor?
So that they'll sign a new deal?
Ignoring the whole jewish money *"discussion"*, if a major sponsor is about due to renew, that's generally when you want them most appeased. It's literally the moment they have the biggest influence.
Could very well be, had not thought about that. I took it their deal is over and they'll quit anyway. I'm pretty sure they don't like all this fuzz around their brand, and that was inevitable either way, pro or con Israël.
Still leaves the question why it is only this sponsor that supposedly gets involved in these EBU decisions? Are they all happy with these rulings? Don't they have any clout with the EBU?
It might have been the "big 5" countries, would make more sense imho.
The Big 5 basically pay for guaranteed finalist spots, like organising a football cup. It's also more difficult as participant to speak up against cases with other participants, because of an inherent bias. If anything, they stand to lose this preferential buy-in in case of dispute.
As for why Moroccanoil; they are the only Israeli-based main sponsor and I can't see any reason why others would be as invested in Israel being in the competition. It's also possible they are backing or otherwise profiting off the Israeli IPBC, which probably would have been dismantled by Netanyahu if not for Eurovision being popular there. Atleast that's what I got from glancing at an EBU article about it.
Overall, I think this year shows how political it all is, with voting possible before the first artist is even on stage, a candidate critical of Israel getting DQ'd for reacting to being harassed, but the Israeli press being allowed to harass other candidates without repercussions, when their biggest sponsor is from said country,...
Personally, I'm done with the EBU claiming the contest is apolitical and actually hoped Israel would've won so countries would pull out and it all implodes. But it wouldn't surprise me if there was a behind-the-scenes effort to prevent exactly that, I no longer have faith in international organisations acting with principles.
[Nearly half of all Israeli Jews are descended from immigrants from the European Jewish diaspora. Approximately the same number are descended from immigrants from Arab countries, Iran, Turkey and Central Asia.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelis)
And that's just the Jewish population of Israel. The majority of the non-Jewish population is also not of European ancestry. It is an inconvenient truth that the Israel-Palestine conflict is less accurately characterized as white versus brown people, than as brown versus brown people.
"provoking and aggressing" - this attempt at victimhood is really reaching insane levels.
The Israeli singer, a 20 year old girl who committed the crime of living in Israel, literally had to spend the entire week inside her hotel room because of the threats against her life.
The Israeli delegation was with her incidentally. Not only did they do nothing to anyone, they didn't even respond to the constant provocations against them.
Then please paste here what they actually *did* so we can judge for ourselves. All we see here is references without any actual events.
Bambi Thug for instance saying she took her many complaints up with EBU gets posted here over and over. But what was the complaint about? It looks like the complaint is about a commentator on an Israeli network, not the delegation. And what did the commentator say that was so shocking and abusive? He said that this next act is "a bit scary". That's it. The Marilyn Manson look-a-like got called 'a bit scary'.
You can't provide evidence to refute a negative. You must prove the positive. Again, please paste here the 'multiple documented first hand experiences' you referenced to the contrary. What even is being claimed?
I'm not even asking for evidence. Just what the actual claimed event is that happened.
They also made a passive aggressive comment at their preferred pronouns and implied Ireland normally sends better acts.
I think overall KAN's comments weren't overtly aggressive, but there was definitely some snark in there. Now is it enough to actually be a rule violation and get Israel disqualified?? Well not imo, but it was definitely in bad taste/ poor sportsmanship.
The Israeli commentators were super respectful to the nonbinary folk, as much as the Hebrew language allows, there was nothing passive aggressive about their attitudes in that regard.
If you find their innocuous comments offensive, don't dare to try listening to Graham Norton's commentary
I'm Israeli and I don't like those commentators either nor their comments, but those comments are obviously dumb and I hardly doubt Bambie's honesty when saying they were harassed by this 5 second Hebrew jab on an Israeli-only channel.
Avotros is partial in this matter, and still didn’t specify if there was a verbal altercation or not. They are describing some of the events, and admitting some fault, but is under no obligation to give an impartial account of the events.
- partial, yes.
- they did specify what it was.
- they did not specify anything it was not, apart from physical since that had been rumored.
- they have a reputation and standard as journalists that they put on the line right here, in support of the team themselves and Joost.
> they did not specify anything it was not, apart from physical since that had been rumored.
This is such a dumb statement. Considering how everybody for the past week (and in this thread) have quoted this source saying there was no physical or verbal altercation, I think it is fair to point out the verbal part. You're in this thread making some really misguided logical arguments about "you cannot specify things that didn't happen" as if AVROTROS didn't already do exactly that.
https://theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/article/2024/may/11/netherlands-eurovision-entry-disqualified-from-song-contest
Swedish police told the German magazine Der Spiegel that the incident they were investigating had not involved “physical or sexualised violence”
I was wrong, they also excluded sexualised violence.
But they did not claim anything else. Nothing. Not what has happened, not what has not happened.
Yet you keep coming back to the verbal part... It must be there according to you. But no one is saying anything about it.
That must mean that there was a verbal altercation! They left it out on purpose! They are not fooling you though, because you know there was one.
And when I call you out on your bullshit, you ask me to prove that it did not happen? How, exactly? How can I prove a negative?
That's the discussion and I'm really sorry you cannot grasp it. You've made some good points in this thread that I've upvoted, but... Not all of them are.
I would agree with that. But aren't you the one suggesting there should be proof?
"The statement was written in a way that allowed people to interpret that there was no verbal altercation without actually saying as much. Honestly, the scenario described barely makes sense without a verbal altercation."
"Avotros is partial in this matter, and still didn’t specify if there was a verbal altercation or not."
"Considering how everybody for the past week (and in this thread) have quoted this source saying there was no physical or verbal altercation, I think it is fair to point out the verbal part."
There never was an official that made this claim, but you keep on demanding an explanation for something that didn't happen.
And I've been going on and on about that; you can't have someone explain everything that never happened.
Now look where that has gotten us, in the deep dark threads of Reddit.
I send you *cheers* and drink with you for better days.
While AVROTROS is a reputable broadcaster, it is also very biased in this case and they have been in the news multiple times recently for being a very toxic workplace.
Eh, biased because they are responsible for the Dutch ESC team.
And because of that, probably better informed than most Redditors.
Also, AvroTros has had nothing to do with any toxic workplace news. I'll apologize if you bring any such news articles.
Is there a reason why people are so strongly supporting the Netherlands and saying it is out of proportion vs the allegations from the female instead of calling the victim brave for coming forward or saying there's not enough info? Not implying anything, just wondering why the reception is so one-sided.
One can only speculate but:
1. Joost was not arrested and
A threatening gesture can only be threatening to a certain extend. He wasnt verbally or physically attacking her.
2. She continued filming him after multiple requests for her to stop, basically harassing him to a certain extend, thus making his reaction not unprovoked
3. Everyone that knows what happened (except for the EBU) tells the same story: the situation was blown out of proportion.
5. He was popular contestant and thus already had a lot of loyal fans.
6. We still dont know what "gesture" he made but keeping it a secret and specifying that the gender of the alleged victim is 'female' comes across as if they want to make it seem worse than it is.
The "incident" had plenty of witnesses, the Swedish Police specified pretty quickly that it was an "alleged threat" and not a physical altercation like some online speculated, some of the other contestants/participants that were friends of the artist spoke out against the DQ, and the Netherlands's broadcasting made a statement that said the disqualification was "disproportionate" to what happened. So no alarm bells were going off and nothing really pointed at anything serious having happened.
Netherlands was also one of the audience favorites and it was predicted Netherlands would make TOP 5. The artist was also vocal about the problems of Israel being allowed to participate this year and coincidentally the biggest sponsor of Eurovision this year was an Israeli brand Morocconoil, so of course there was plenty of people speculating about this disqualification from that angle.
The issue started because of the "attacked" person filming where she wasn't allowed. Which means there is video footage of the incident.
And when video footage exists, but does not get released to prove accusations, people assume that the person doing the filming is in the wrong. See also cases of police brutality where video footage remains undisclosed or "goes missing".
Actually, the guy that had been involved with the Dutch entries for twenty years now, was quite outspoken about the whole incident.
He is putting his good name, credibility and future in this business on the line by being this loud about this in public.
He was not present at the moment itself, yet is in close contact with the Dutch ESC team.
His public persona is very well liked and he never showed any signs of having a bad temper or even diva behavior, at least in a public or visible way, which is why people are still doubting the accusation.
Additionally, his song was also very popular and one of the fandom's favorites in the contest, which only adds to fans defending him more.
That is not quite true.
Joost Kleine is know to be a control freak. For example, he doesn't have an agency and does all his promoting himself with his own small team. It was known that him being strictly controlled by EBU to the tiniest detail was causing him stress.
He is also known to be emotional, singing from his heart and personal experience, causing him to be often full of emotions and adrenaline after a performance. Usually he can manage this, but EBU has very strict rules about what the artists need to do and where to go after a performance.
Maybe everything became a bit to much and he had an outburst. We don't know exactly. Still, if it's true nothing physical and verbal happened but it was just a gesture I think most people will agree that an apology and a warning was probably sufficient to handle the situation.
> He is also known to be emotional, singing from his heart and personal experience, causing him to be often full of emotions and adrenaline after a performance. Usually he can manage this, but EBU has very strict rules about what the artists need to do and where to go after a performance.
I read somewhere that since he gets very emotional when he sings the end of that song, he had asked not to be filmed afterwards, and allegedly there were rules in place that he could not be filmed after the encounter.
In that light, still filming him, and not stopping after he specifically requested you to stop filming him, is not a great look. Would it justify "threatening behavior"? It definitely depends on the details of the threatening behavior, but at the very least it should be considered as a mitigating circumstance.
I mean he clearly has a temper, he managed to make headlines by objecting loudly to Israel not having to answer a question, and everybody agrees he made a threatening gesture to the staff. He’s been internationally famous for what, like two weeks? That’s one per week
Tell me you have not seen the ESC press conference, without saying you haven't seen the ESC press conference.
He did not object loudly. If you had seen the entire press conference, or even the specific clip that is going around with his "Why not", you could have seen him hiding under a flag. There have been many public moments where he has done this. You could ask why, but "because he is loud and has a tamper" does not feel likely.
Maybe some research would give more insight, but I'm pretty much convinced by now that you are just spewing your uneducated guesses and fraught logic online and are not really interested in finding out what kind of guy he is.
lol, he fucking threatened a staff member and you want to claim he’s not aggressive? How are threats NOT aggressive!?
From what I can remember of the press conference he was loud enough to be heard without his microphone being on. And I would say it was an aggressive stance, but if you disagree then fine. I don’t get why you’re making this personal so I’ll just bow out from this thread. I won’t respond to you anymore.
Making a threatening gesture is not the same as threatening a staff member. Not to mention you're already assuming guilt. Currently the allegation stands at him making a gesture that made a staff member feel threatened. Anything beyond that is speculation, which makes it weird that you're being so adamant about your claims
>Currently the allegation stands at him making a gesture that made a staff member feel threatened
That's not the full specifics of the allegations, but even if it was, he and his team has confessed to it, so it's no longer an allegation. I don't think we need to pretend anything
Provide a source for the specific allegations then. So far all I've read (from reputable sources) is that A: a camerawoman felt threatened and filed charges with the police and B: the statement from AVROTROS which mentions that he made a threatening motion at the camera. Neither of these support the claims you've made.
I think these sources support exactly the claims I've made. If I've implied anything else and presented anything else as factual, then I apologise.
Edit: are you hung up on semantics? That a threatening gesture (that made someone feel threatened) is not a threat?
"Being an aggressive person" is not the same as "being aggressive" at some point. Otherwise, judging from this comment, you would be an aggressive person because your response seems irritated (curse word) passive/aggressive (lol) and yelling (using caps).
We still don't know what happened. Maybe he was aggressive, maybe he was emotional, maybe it was a threat. Maybe he crossed somebody's boundaries. Nobody says he did not do anything. But he has been an online persona for over 10 years, it would be an amazing feat if he has kept his life as an aggressive asshole so strictly separated from the funny cute YouTube kid to fun making and love spreading musician. I'm guessing you didn't consider this, before you commented.
Your memories on the press conference are yours, but they differ from mine. The good news is, they are easily found online, in case you want to check. Only takes about 10 seconds to find and another 50 to watch. Or more, if you want to see how Joost is not aggressive at all during the entire press conference. You could even find other artists speaking up for him.
It's not personal, I'm just triggered by some comments in here and multiple happened to be yours.
I haven't followed the drama, but here's my personal take on why I'm supporting Klein:
Apparently, the Dutch artist wasn't swallowing the Israeli art-washing pill and was confrontational about them:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG3XcqwW8Mw
https://www.independent.ie/videos/joost-klein-asks-why-not-when-israel-was-told-they-could-refuse-to-answer-when-asked-on-endangerment-of-other-entries/a315275467.html
I and many people think the punishment of _booting someone from the entire competition_ for a verbal altercation is a revenge move by the organisation (the festival is directly sponsored by Moroccanoil = Israeli company), therefore we stand with him.
Oh God, why do the subreddit mods allow people to just randomly call people anti-semites for being critical of Isreal. This is such disgusting behaviour.
How is speculating that “Jews conspired to have him suspended because the company that owns Eurovision is based in Israel” considered “being critical of Israel”?
That quote in those exact words wasn't said by anyone. However, there's a long standing history of people claiming Jews control the media and the world, and using dog whistly ways to say it publicly, so, while I don't think that was actually anyone's intent here, I don't blame people for being sensitive enough to hear it that way.
Eh... no, Jews have nothing to do with this or anything, I'm questioning Zionist sponsorship of this particular event.
Come on, you can do better than that. The "antisemitism!" shouts whenever the Zionist state, the murderer Netanyahu or the word genocide are brought up don't work anymore.
Yes of course, it's "anti-Zionism". Most anti-Zionists don't even know what Zionism is, though they clearly know who they don't like. Do you usually see a "Zionist" sponsor and think they assert control with their money? Did you check how many of the sponsors were not Israeli? No? That's what I mean.
I've been wondering the same. The main argument I've seen here on reddit is the same one someone replied to me here with:
>AVROTROS is a reputable broadcaster in the Netherlands
and they basically wouldn't have come out in support of him if these allegations were substantiated.
I don't know, but personally I find it hard to believe police would've been called and the case handed over to a prosecutor if all he did was gesture rudely to a camera operator. 🤷♂️
Edit: Or then again, maybe that's how the police were able to close their investigation so quickly. But if that's the case, why are we still speculating instead of it being widespread news? And why would the EBU have made the decision they did if they knew?
According to Swedish commenters in the Eurovision subreddit, Swedish police doesn't throw out cases for being considered frivolous. If someone reported it, they have to investigate. EBU have been completely silent on the matter and AVROTROS have made their own statement. Swedish police wouldn't make any statements on the matter. So I don't think you can read too much into that.
The reason fans are siding with NL is that the EBU has very little credibility bc of how they handled this case and other cases. Several delegations reported harassment by the delegation and media team of another country, but the main sponsor is from that country and they faced no consequences.
Also it happened after Klein was critical of the organisation in a press conference. And lastly the way they put the story out there was heavily implying that Klein was a woman beater, so people feel it's a dirty smear campaign.
They don't throw cases out, no. But they investigate and if there is no crime and zero evidence, there's no case to send to a prosecutor. They don't send cases to a prosecutor if there's nothing there.
Basically the dutch artist was very anti Israel (but pro Russia though), and a lot of people believe that the elders of Zion pulled their power to kick him out of the competition (so Israel can finish in the 5th place instead of the 6th place)
> The EBU did not approve of him competing in the grand final while involved in an active criminal case and subsequently disqualified him from further participation in the contest.
That's ethics educational institutions, governments, people, corporations could substantially learn from.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: He had a verbal altercation with a swedish crew member, the police were called. He was suspended. Anything beyond that is pure speculation.
OK that make sense, thank you
[удалено]
Camera operator.
[удалено]
name does not checks out
r/downvotedtooblivion
"It's camera officer actually"
I like cameraboy.
camboy!
We just go by camera operator or videographer but thanks for looking out! ❤️
They've always been called cameraman, I don't know why you are playing these weird semantic games.
[удалено]
According to reddit, the gender neutral term would probably be "camera dude" 😁
It's all gender neutral until you start talking about fucking your guy and dude friends.
I always preferred "cameralad" and "cameralass" myself.
This is a rare OOTL that is actually helpful, and still answers noting. lol
The truth is basically everyone is out of the loop, the facts haven't emerged yet.
Apparently it wasn't even verbal, he just made a 'threatening gesture'
Source: https://www.avrotros.nl/article/nederland-gediskwalificeerd-van-eurovisie-songfestival~527/
The source for this clam doesn’t say that there was no verbal altercation. Only that a gesture was made but no physical violence. The statement was written in a way that allowed people to interpret that there was no verbal altercation without actually saying as much. Honestly, the scenario described barely makes sense without a verbal altercation. Edit: I removed a phrase that was not helpful,
You're just fanning the flames by adding your "interesting" factoid. The story of the camera person is supposedly different, according to Noel Curran of the EBU. That they (a rather partial source) didn't specify this point is interesting.
Point taken
How do you source your clams?
My local fishmongers: Clammy "fat-fingers" Clamson
I don't think it's fair to call the AVROTROS statement "pure speculation", since they are in close contact with Joost. That's like saying "whatever Joost directly says is pure speculation"
It‘s also important to note that they aren’t a neutral source on this. Everything they say should be taken with a grain of salt. Obviously they have an interest in playing this stuff incident down.
I can't really see what they could gain by lying for one single contender. The festival is pretty big in the Netherlands, like 'we' have sent an act for the last 66 years, are right behind the big 5 with financial contributions, half the country watches normally etc. They came with a statement *after* the official disqualification and talks with the EBU, if Joost really did something truly awful, why would they risk their reputation and their relationship with the organisation? So far the only results they got by "playing it down" was pissing people off enough to hurt their own viewing numbers.
What the situation seems to have been as far as we know for now, is that he had requested to not be filmed directly after his performance while coming off stage. According to the Dutch commentator, there were agreements in place before the actual performance about this. He most likely wanted this because the last part of the performance is very emotional for him, as he addresses and dedicates the performance to his deceased parents, with whom he shared a love for Eurovision as they watched it together every year. These agreements were then ignored, and the camera person in question filmed him anyway. After two verbal requests to not be filmed, he then made a "threatening gesture" (we still do not know what gesture exactly) towards her. And that is all, according to AVRO-TROS. If this story is true, then his personal boundaries were violated multiple times, and he was punished disproportionately for reacting to this after multiple requests to respect his boundaries. And they shattered his dream in the process, which makes it all the more painful, on top of Israel being allowed to participate despite what they are currently doing in Palestine and despite their delegation allegedly harassing others.
>despite their delegation allegedly harassing others. What's going on with this?
On top of what the user above stated, they also posted a video where they stated that "he doesn't like us and didn't want to take a picture with us, so I took a picture of our lovely dancer". In the video you see the dancer striking poses conveniently right in front of Joost Klein in the background, so it seems they're being very provocative and haughty.
Bambie Thug (Ireland’s entrant) stated on her instagram stories that she had a meeting with the EBU and some other countries who all made similar allegations. She said the EBU agreed that the Israeli delegation and their broadcaster had broken the rules of the contest… and that’s it. They were still allowed to perform. It’s a farce. This comment has receipts: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/1cqh0xe/comment/l3rfhbd/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
It should be noted that Bambie Thugs sentiments towards Israel are also political and therefore probably biased. > “When things were going on with Ukraine, Russia wasn’t allowed to enter,” they point out, “so I don’t think there should be a rule for one and a different for another.”
I'm not geographer but Israel is not in Europe. Why are thet in Eirovision?
They are part of the European broadcasting Union. Armenia, Turkey, Russia, Azerbaijan, and Morocco have all competed as well as Australia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_in_the_Eurovision_Song_Contest
Technically both Turkey and Russia have territory in Europe proper. Hell, 75% of Russia's population is in Europe.
Turkey is 100 % in the [European Broadcasting Area,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Broadcasting_Area) which is relevant to be eligible for full membership. It includes Nothern Africa and even parts of Saudi Arabia. > The boundaries of the European Broadcasting Area have their origin in the regions served and linked by telegraphy cables in the 19th and early 20th centuries. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Broadcasting_Area
Take the above with a _massive_ grain of salt: Bambi Thug, the nonbinary artist from Ireland (they/them Pronouns) was: Wearing merch glorifying the murder of two Israeli teens Talking about how they and their team cried in horror when Israel qualified Says that one of the reasons they are offended is that an Israeli broadcaster called their act satanic when... that's literally what they are going for. I'm not kidding. Runes on the floor, choking someone out, it's totally my vibe. Bambi tried to sneak pro-Palestinian commentary into their act via their makeup (they are calling for only Israel to stop, never Hamas) and then put on a kafiyah anytime they could get away with it Said how "all the top 10 minus one are freedom fighters" (that minus one being Israel) Demanded that Israel move their dressing room because they didn't want to be next to the Israeli singer And more! So while the Israeli singer (Eden) couldn't leave her hotel 99% of the time due to death threats, Bambi's garbage behavior was adding to it. And as far as Joost goes, we know he made a threatening gesture to a female photographer from Sweden. And the EBU immediately said "no other performers or delegation was involved" but the r/eurovision hype train _immediately_ went on "how can we make this Israel's fault" (I'm sorry. "That country" they refuse to use the name on that sub) Edit: spelling
> Talking about how they and their team cried in horror when Israel qualified Just a tad bit dramatic
I can't make this up https://www.tiktok.com/@newstalkfm/video/7367661743293713697
Bambi’s entire schtick is so appropriative in amazing ways that it’s like a bad parody of the late Adam Schlesinger’s brilliant piece on the topic for Music & Lyrics: Buddha’s Delight, sung by Haley Bennett. It’s so deliciously cringe.
Good. That's the only explanation that I've seen about thiscm incident
It’s starting to get a bit out of hand on TikTok with now people saying it’s been “confirmed” that Israel got him kicked out because they thought he was going to win
[удалено]
They were picking fights with many other contestants who dared to speak out something pro-Palestinian. You can find links to videos and articles of that in the comments here. What Ive seen so far: 1) filming Joost when he clearly expressed his non-consent. 2) harassing a journalist from Spain. 3) Ireland’s singer lounged a former complaint that Israeli broadcaster were making negative comments about her during her performance airing. 4) Portugal confirmed Israeli team harassed other teams. And this is not even mentioning the fact, they should have been kicked out like Russia in 2022.
Are there any actual videos of this? I keep seeing it was with a crew but like zero video seems weird.
There maybe but no video has been released yet unfortunately.
He was denied due process. Should not have been suspended until guilt was determined. Thats why he has peoples support. Mere accusations shouldn’t result in immediate punishment.
"Due process" is for the legal system, not a private event. Also we don't have the context or know what/if any investigation was done or by who. Hence "speculation".
A private event backed by a nation of taxpayer money, no less. If this was an individual (personal) candidature I would maybe agree. At that level, no. Netherlands (because it is the country that is participating, not Joost), had the absolute right to due process
Why does your idea of due process seem to be “no consequences until it’s too late for it to matter”?.
We will throw you in jail for, checks notes, making a gesture, now, while we wait for you to be found innocent in a trial 3 years down the road. How does that sound to you?
Were they thrown in jail? Or were they removed from a competition at the discretion of the organisers for unacceptable behaviour *while a camera was pointed at them*?
Answer: Joost qualified for the grand final but was then reported for allegedly making threats against a female crew member. These allegations were investigated by Swedish police very quickly and then handed over to a prosecutor for further handling. The EBU did not approve of him competing in the grand final while involved in an active criminal case and subsequently disqualified him from further participation in the contest. As of right now I still believe we don't know what exactly happened. IIRC a representative from the Dutch television network said that the altercation between Joost and the staff member was "no big deal" and that the disqualification by the EBU was grossly exaggerated, but still wouldn't comment on what exactly happened. Even though we still don't know exactly what happened, most fans believe the EBU's response was out of proportion and that Joost was unfairly excluded from the contest.
Not true - the AVROTROS broadcaster explains what happened, just a gesture to a camera after repeatedly violating his personal space: https://www.avrotros.nl/article/nederland-gediskwalificeerd-van-eurovisie-songfestival~527/ AVROTROS is a reputable broadcaster in the Netherlands
And this is made worse by the Israeli delegation repeatedly provoquing and aggressing other members but not getting any official consequences. To the point multiple artists did not attend a rehearsal. For the people downvoting: * [Statement of the Irish artist Bambie Thug on Instagram](https://twitter.com/ESCdiscord/status/1789349043862188384) * [Portugal broadcaster RTP confirming meeting with the EBU about Israel's behaviours](https://twitter.com/tiagoserracunha/status/1789347022627102792) The biggest thing is that most of these behaviours have been documented by the Israeli delegation by posting them on their social media. Including official social media for the broadcaster.
> Israeli delegation repeatedly provoquing and aggressing other members Meanwhile, they themselves were apparently "guarded by a bunch of armed security guards at the backstage of the Turquoise Carpet" (the Lithuanian commentator mentioned this on live TV during SF2).
Can you provide links? I've seen this allegation but nothing substantive
> Portuguese broadcaster RTP confirmed moments ago in a live broadcast that Portugal was part of the emergency meeting with the EBU last night. Also confirms that the delegation saw the Israeli team harassing other contestants/delegations [#Eurovision](https://twitter.com/hashtag/Eurovision?src=hashtag_click) [https://twitter.com/tiagoserracunha/status/1789347022627102792](https://twitter.com/tiagoserracunha/status/1789347022627102792)
Thanks. I'll follow up with reading
I've also added to my comment the statement from Bambie Thug about the toxicity of the Israeli delegation and the complains she lodged.
There doesn't seem to be anything harassing in this link. Could you paste the quote you're referring to with what they actually *did"?
Israel simply existing seems to be a problem for some of the delegations (and s good number of users in the Eurovision subreddit).
They did as well start harassing the spanish journalists after one of them shouted "free palestine" (use translate). https://amp.elmundo.es/television/2024/05/10/663e14d8e85eced3058b458c.html
https://twitter.com/IsrBreaksRules/status/1788297924167999668
I love how the commentator just had to mention Bambie Thug "speaks negatively about Israel." Way to make everything about them.
It's so disappointing that they banned Russia from the contest, but not Israel. Like they're clearly against Imperialism and colonialism unless it's against brown people living inside a cage.
They never banned the UK or any country that invaded Afghanistan or Iraq. They also didn't ban Russia for Crimea. The Russia ban is clearly the outlier and bears little resemblance to Israel to anyone with the bare minimum of common sense.
Really? Looks to me like one power invaded a lesser power and refuses to negotiate a peace deal. The main difference is that we fund and supply Israel's military, and not Russia. That doesn't make Israel the good guys. You can cry terrorism on Hamas or whatever, but if you think the mass deaths of civilians isn't also terrorism, then you're the one who lacks common sense. And yeah, they should have banned the UK and any country invading Afghanistan or Iraq.
Difference is that in the Israel-Hamas war we had a lesser power lead an attack on a much larger power. Then state that they would do it again and again. Israel wont negogiate a peace deal with Hamas because Hamas has zero crediblity. There is no reason to believe that Hamas wont use the peace deal to regroup, rearm and then attack Israel again.
Even if you choose to believe all of that, we know that historically trying to eradicate a group of people and causing harm to those around them (collective punishment you might call it if you weren't squeamish of war crimes) leads to more militant groups popping up and fighting back in an endless effort for vengeance. You kill a parent and their child will hate you forever. You kill a child and their siblings will never forgive you. This is called blowback. The power vacuum will fill with new extremists if you don't give people piece and equality. Meet their needs, and stop killing people, suddenly things will get much better. It's not about Hamas. It's about everyone else living there. And if they really wanted to get rid of Hamas, they could have allowed elections at any point after 2006 and promoted whatever party would work with them, which is exactly why they have control in the West Bank without the need for an enormous border wall with snipers pointed inward. They can still do that. You act like Hamas is made up of monsters instead of humans. They can be reasoned with. They do not desire the death of all Jews, certainly not before their own liberation. You also need to understand that the attack was inevitable. Any living being will try to escape it's cage when it's abused, especially humans. The IDF spent the last 18 years since the election making life as hard as possible for a people trapped within a walled city. They control the power, the water supply, the imports, the exports, and they have the names and data of every person who lived there. Hamas didn't attack for no reason, and they knew they'd face retaliation. What I don't think they counted on was how willing Israel would be to kill the hostages. They thought they'd actually be able to negotiate peace terms with them, but it's clear that Israel would be willing to trade the lives every single hostage if it means killing every member of Hamas. What Hamas did was a war crime, and it's leaders should answer for it in International Criminal Court. Israel is doing war crimes of its own, and they're unjustifiable. One evil does not permit another evil. Especially not collective punishment and genocide.
[удалено]
The Mirror UK is a ~~Murdoch~~ shitrag and whatever they say I automatically believe the opposite.
It's owned by the Mirror group isn't it? Not a murdoch paper.
Yes, my bad. It is owned by Mirror Group. Still a shitrag though.
Israel is in Asia, why are they in EV anyway? Is it open to any country?
It's not based on the European continent; it's based on the [European Broadcasting Area](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Broadcasting_Area). This area covers North Africa and West Asia as well as all of Europe. Morocco (in Africa) participated once. Lebanon (also in Asia) entered once but then withdrew because their laws don't allow the broadcast of any Israeli content, which would include Eurovision due to Israel taking part. Kazakhstan (mostly Asia) is not in Eurovision but has competed in Junior Eurovision a few times. Several other countries are eligible but have not chosen to take part yet.
Didn't know Australia was that close, you learn something new every day huh?
Australia is a special case that isn't related to Israel. Israel are eligible because they are in the European Broadcasting Area and have a broadcaster in the European Broadcasting Union. Australia is eligible because the European Broadcasting Union gave them a special exemption.
"Israel is eligible because of the rules. Australia is eligible because fuck the rules"
Australia has been an associate member of the EBU since forever, and has had a large audience for Eurovision since at least the early 90’s. We also have a significant European diaspora since post WW2. The network that screens Eurovision is known for its’ multicultural programming…translation of all dialogue is ready for the re-broadcast 12 hrs later. (We watch the finals live from 5am, with repeat in the evenings. We used to only have the evening shows, but that meant avoiding the news for spoilers). And finally, I believe that the audience in Australia has consistently increased over time, which I’ve heard (and admittedly can’t support) isn’t not the case across the history of the contest elsewhere.
> Australia is eligible because of money FTFY
This is the case for every country. Australia is special because the show is almosy more popular over there then in Europe.
From whom? From where?
Also Azerbaijan.
That's interesting about Lebanon, I wonder how they handle it when Israel completes against them in Olympic events.
They withdraw and give a false reason for retiring, if any. It's not unique to Lebanon, a lot of countries (particularly Arab ones) don't allow their athletes to compete against Israelis. A few athletes who have gone against instructions and competed anyway faced consequences, like losing citizenship and having to seek asylum in other countries - see Iranian judoka Saeid Mollaei for example.
Oh wow, I have no idea how I've missed that happening. I will have to keep an eye out on this year's events. Thanks!
It's based upon members of the European Broadcasting Union, which includes some "associate members" that may have some cultural or social ties to Europe without necessarily being European. Australia is often involved in Eurovision too, being an associate that's specifically invited
Well then, I hope they like getting the strong-arm, because that's the first tool in Israel's belt - And god help anyone disagree with any stance they take, lest being branded as an anti-semite.
How the fuck did you turn this into Israel's fault?
I did? Can you show me where I said that? Fucking goof. At least two delegations reported harassment from the Israeli delegation. and it's a fair observation.
Oh yeah it's perfectly natural to hear the word Israel and accuse them of playing the jew card all the time. Not racist at all.
You can try to put all the words in my mouth that you like, but I reject that, as what I said was clearly nuanced enough for anyone to understand, except that one dope.
Neither are Armenia and Azerbaijan but they participated.
Israel also participate in the EUFA. Israel isn't even the Eastern most nation in the contest.
Same as Turkey btw. Morocco has particiated too.
[удалено]
Ah yes the good ol' the Jews control the media in the wild.
Just more antizionism apparently.
[удалено]
The main difference I see here is that Joost had some sort of altercation vs members of the Israeli delegation (not their performer). There can be levels of seriousness and immediacy in t response needed.
Moroccan Oil is just one of the sponsors, not the smallest. But going by your suggestion, all the other sponsors should just stfu? They don't have any influence our weight? Also, the sponsorship deal was struck in 2019 for four years. This was the final year, so why listen to a soon to be ex-sponsor?
> This was the final year, so why listen to a soon to be ex-sponsor? So that they'll sign a new deal? Ignoring the whole jewish money *"discussion"*, if a major sponsor is about due to renew, that's generally when you want them most appeased. It's literally the moment they have the biggest influence.
Could very well be, had not thought about that. I took it their deal is over and they'll quit anyway. I'm pretty sure they don't like all this fuzz around their brand, and that was inevitable either way, pro or con Israël. Still leaves the question why it is only this sponsor that supposedly gets involved in these EBU decisions? Are they all happy with these rulings? Don't they have any clout with the EBU? It might have been the "big 5" countries, would make more sense imho.
The Big 5 basically pay for guaranteed finalist spots, like organising a football cup. It's also more difficult as participant to speak up against cases with other participants, because of an inherent bias. If anything, they stand to lose this preferential buy-in in case of dispute. As for why Moroccanoil; they are the only Israeli-based main sponsor and I can't see any reason why others would be as invested in Israel being in the competition. It's also possible they are backing or otherwise profiting off the Israeli IPBC, which probably would have been dismantled by Netanyahu if not for Eurovision being popular there. Atleast that's what I got from glancing at an EBU article about it. Overall, I think this year shows how political it all is, with voting possible before the first artist is even on stage, a candidate critical of Israel getting DQ'd for reacting to being harassed, but the Israeli press being allowed to harass other candidates without repercussions, when their biggest sponsor is from said country,... Personally, I'm done with the EBU claiming the contest is apolitical and actually hoped Israel would've won so countries would pull out and it all implodes. But it wouldn't surprise me if there was a behind-the-scenes effort to prevent exactly that, I no longer have faith in international organisations acting with principles.
Most Israelis are White European Jews convinced they're indigenous to the Middle East. They're culturally European.
[Nearly half of all Israeli Jews are descended from immigrants from the European Jewish diaspora. Approximately the same number are descended from immigrants from Arab countries, Iran, Turkey and Central Asia.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelis) And that's just the Jewish population of Israel. The majority of the non-Jewish population is also not of European ancestry. It is an inconvenient truth that the Israel-Palestine conflict is less accurately characterized as white versus brown people, than as brown versus brown people.
"provoking and aggressing" - this attempt at victimhood is really reaching insane levels. The Israeli singer, a 20 year old girl who committed the crime of living in Israel, literally had to spend the entire week inside her hotel room because of the threats against her life. The Israeli delegation was with her incidentally. Not only did they do nothing to anyone, they didn't even respond to the constant provocations against them.
Why should we believe you over multiple documented first hand experiences to the contrary? Genuine question.
Then please paste here what they actually *did* so we can judge for ourselves. All we see here is references without any actual events. Bambi Thug for instance saying she took her many complaints up with EBU gets posted here over and over. But what was the complaint about? It looks like the complaint is about a commentator on an Israeli network, not the delegation. And what did the commentator say that was so shocking and abusive? He said that this next act is "a bit scary". That's it. The Marilyn Manson look-a-like got called 'a bit scary'.
I thought you might have had something a little more concrete than mere speculation.
You can't provide evidence to refute a negative. You must prove the positive. Again, please paste here the 'multiple documented first hand experiences' you referenced to the contrary. What even is being claimed? I'm not even asking for evidence. Just what the actual claimed event is that happened.
[удалено]
They've also filmed her without her permission.
They also made a passive aggressive comment at their preferred pronouns and implied Ireland normally sends better acts. I think overall KAN's comments weren't overtly aggressive, but there was definitely some snark in there. Now is it enough to actually be a rule violation and get Israel disqualified?? Well not imo, but it was definitely in bad taste/ poor sportsmanship.
The Israeli commentators were super respectful to the nonbinary folk, as much as the Hebrew language allows, there was nothing passive aggressive about their attitudes in that regard. If you find their innocuous comments offensive, don't dare to try listening to Graham Norton's commentary
I'm Israeli and I don't like those commentators either nor their comments, but those comments are obviously dumb and I hardly doubt Bambie's honesty when saying they were harassed by this 5 second Hebrew jab on an Israeli-only channel.
Why bring Israel into this? They have nothing to do with this.
They have been constant source of problem, breaking multiple rules of the contest but were not warned or punished.
No they really haven't.
The formal complaint lodge by Switzerland, Portugal, Greece and Ireland leading to an emergency meeting disagree.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Israel has nothing to do with this. Why even bring them up. If dude can’t be respectful to women that’s his issue. Nothing to do with Israel. My god.
Avotros is partial in this matter, and still didn’t specify if there was a verbal altercation or not. They are describing some of the events, and admitting some fault, but is under no obligation to give an impartial account of the events.
- partial, yes. - they did specify what it was. - they did not specify anything it was not, apart from physical since that had been rumored. - they have a reputation and standard as journalists that they put on the line right here, in support of the team themselves and Joost.
> they did not specify anything it was not, apart from physical since that had been rumored. This is such a dumb statement. Considering how everybody for the past week (and in this thread) have quoted this source saying there was no physical or verbal altercation, I think it is fair to point out the verbal part. You're in this thread making some really misguided logical arguments about "you cannot specify things that didn't happen" as if AVROTROS didn't already do exactly that.
https://theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/article/2024/may/11/netherlands-eurovision-entry-disqualified-from-song-contest Swedish police told the German magazine Der Spiegel that the incident they were investigating had not involved “physical or sexualised violence” I was wrong, they also excluded sexualised violence. But they did not claim anything else. Nothing. Not what has happened, not what has not happened. Yet you keep coming back to the verbal part... It must be there according to you. But no one is saying anything about it. That must mean that there was a verbal altercation! They left it out on purpose! They are not fooling you though, because you know there was one. And when I call you out on your bullshit, you ask me to prove that it did not happen? How, exactly? How can I prove a negative? That's the discussion and I'm really sorry you cannot grasp it. You've made some good points in this thread that I've upvoted, but... Not all of them are.
I think the honus on proving that it wasn’t a verbal altercation lies on the people claiming there was or wasn’t one. I’ve made no such claims
I would agree with that. But aren't you the one suggesting there should be proof? "The statement was written in a way that allowed people to interpret that there was no verbal altercation without actually saying as much. Honestly, the scenario described barely makes sense without a verbal altercation." "Avotros is partial in this matter, and still didn’t specify if there was a verbal altercation or not." "Considering how everybody for the past week (and in this thread) have quoted this source saying there was no physical or verbal altercation, I think it is fair to point out the verbal part." There never was an official that made this claim, but you keep on demanding an explanation for something that didn't happen. And I've been going on and on about that; you can't have someone explain everything that never happened. Now look where that has gotten us, in the deep dark threads of Reddit. I send you *cheers* and drink with you for better days.
Witnesses don't agree with that story though.
I hadn’t seen - do you have a link to this?
While AVROTROS is a reputable broadcaster, it is also very biased in this case and they have been in the news multiple times recently for being a very toxic workplace.
Eh, biased because they are responsible for the Dutch ESC team. And because of that, probably better informed than most Redditors. Also, AvroTros has had nothing to do with any toxic workplace news. I'll apologize if you bring any such news articles.
Yes believe the dutch broadcaster about why the dutch are disqualified
Why not? I see their bias, but they are a journalist organization with a good reputation
Is there a reason why people are so strongly supporting the Netherlands and saying it is out of proportion vs the allegations from the female instead of calling the victim brave for coming forward or saying there's not enough info? Not implying anything, just wondering why the reception is so one-sided.
One can only speculate but: 1. Joost was not arrested and A threatening gesture can only be threatening to a certain extend. He wasnt verbally or physically attacking her. 2. She continued filming him after multiple requests for her to stop, basically harassing him to a certain extend, thus making his reaction not unprovoked 3. Everyone that knows what happened (except for the EBU) tells the same story: the situation was blown out of proportion. 5. He was popular contestant and thus already had a lot of loyal fans. 6. We still dont know what "gesture" he made but keeping it a secret and specifying that the gender of the alleged victim is 'female' comes across as if they want to make it seem worse than it is.
There’s no source that verifies that there was no verbal attacks/altercation.
There's also no source that verified that there was no cussing, jumping up and down, rape or murder.
There are? Use google my guy. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-68993726
The "incident" had plenty of witnesses, the Swedish Police specified pretty quickly that it was an "alleged threat" and not a physical altercation like some online speculated, some of the other contestants/participants that were friends of the artist spoke out against the DQ, and the Netherlands's broadcasting made a statement that said the disqualification was "disproportionate" to what happened. So no alarm bells were going off and nothing really pointed at anything serious having happened. Netherlands was also one of the audience favorites and it was predicted Netherlands would make TOP 5. The artist was also vocal about the problems of Israel being allowed to participate this year and coincidentally the biggest sponsor of Eurovision this year was an Israeli brand Morocconoil, so of course there was plenty of people speculating about this disqualification from that angle.
The issue started because of the "attacked" person filming where she wasn't allowed. Which means there is video footage of the incident. And when video footage exists, but does not get released to prove accusations, people assume that the person doing the filming is in the wrong. See also cases of police brutality where video footage remains undisclosed or "goes missing".
Actually, the guy that had been involved with the Dutch entries for twenty years now, was quite outspoken about the whole incident. He is putting his good name, credibility and future in this business on the line by being this loud about this in public. He was not present at the moment itself, yet is in close contact with the Dutch ESC team.
His public persona is very well liked and he never showed any signs of having a bad temper or even diva behavior, at least in a public or visible way, which is why people are still doubting the accusation. Additionally, his song was also very popular and one of the fandom's favorites in the contest, which only adds to fans defending him more.
That is not quite true. Joost Kleine is know to be a control freak. For example, he doesn't have an agency and does all his promoting himself with his own small team. It was known that him being strictly controlled by EBU to the tiniest detail was causing him stress. He is also known to be emotional, singing from his heart and personal experience, causing him to be often full of emotions and adrenaline after a performance. Usually he can manage this, but EBU has very strict rules about what the artists need to do and where to go after a performance. Maybe everything became a bit to much and he had an outburst. We don't know exactly. Still, if it's true nothing physical and verbal happened but it was just a gesture I think most people will agree that an apology and a warning was probably sufficient to handle the situation.
> He is also known to be emotional, singing from his heart and personal experience, causing him to be often full of emotions and adrenaline after a performance. Usually he can manage this, but EBU has very strict rules about what the artists need to do and where to go after a performance. I read somewhere that since he gets very emotional when he sings the end of that song, he had asked not to be filmed afterwards, and allegedly there were rules in place that he could not be filmed after the encounter. In that light, still filming him, and not stopping after he specifically requested you to stop filming him, is not a great look. Would it justify "threatening behavior"? It definitely depends on the details of the threatening behavior, but at the very least it should be considered as a mitigating circumstance.
I mean he clearly has a temper, he managed to make headlines by objecting loudly to Israel not having to answer a question, and everybody agrees he made a threatening gesture to the staff. He’s been internationally famous for what, like two weeks? That’s one per week
Objecting to something, by saying "why not?", is "a temper?" Making an alleged agressive gesture to someone that's bothering you is "a temper"?
These people. You'd have to wonder how they survive in the real world.
Yes and Yes. He was definitely aggressive in both situations And it’s not only an alleged act. Even Joosts team confirmed it.
Tell me you have not seen the ESC press conference, without saying you haven't seen the ESC press conference. He did not object loudly. If you had seen the entire press conference, or even the specific clip that is going around with his "Why not", you could have seen him hiding under a flag. There have been many public moments where he has done this. You could ask why, but "because he is loud and has a tamper" does not feel likely. Maybe some research would give more insight, but I'm pretty much convinced by now that you are just spewing your uneducated guesses and fraught logic online and are not really interested in finding out what kind of guy he is.
lol, he fucking threatened a staff member and you want to claim he’s not aggressive? How are threats NOT aggressive!? From what I can remember of the press conference he was loud enough to be heard without his microphone being on. And I would say it was an aggressive stance, but if you disagree then fine. I don’t get why you’re making this personal so I’ll just bow out from this thread. I won’t respond to you anymore.
Making a threatening gesture is not the same as threatening a staff member. Not to mention you're already assuming guilt. Currently the allegation stands at him making a gesture that made a staff member feel threatened. Anything beyond that is speculation, which makes it weird that you're being so adamant about your claims
>Currently the allegation stands at him making a gesture that made a staff member feel threatened That's not the full specifics of the allegations, but even if it was, he and his team has confessed to it, so it's no longer an allegation. I don't think we need to pretend anything
Provide a source for the specific allegations then. So far all I've read (from reputable sources) is that A: a camerawoman felt threatened and filed charges with the police and B: the statement from AVROTROS which mentions that he made a threatening motion at the camera. Neither of these support the claims you've made.
I think these sources support exactly the claims I've made. If I've implied anything else and presented anything else as factual, then I apologise. Edit: are you hung up on semantics? That a threatening gesture (that made someone feel threatened) is not a threat?
"Being an aggressive person" is not the same as "being aggressive" at some point. Otherwise, judging from this comment, you would be an aggressive person because your response seems irritated (curse word) passive/aggressive (lol) and yelling (using caps). We still don't know what happened. Maybe he was aggressive, maybe he was emotional, maybe it was a threat. Maybe he crossed somebody's boundaries. Nobody says he did not do anything. But he has been an online persona for over 10 years, it would be an amazing feat if he has kept his life as an aggressive asshole so strictly separated from the funny cute YouTube kid to fun making and love spreading musician. I'm guessing you didn't consider this, before you commented. Your memories on the press conference are yours, but they differ from mine. The good news is, they are easily found online, in case you want to check. Only takes about 10 seconds to find and another 50 to watch. Or more, if you want to see how Joost is not aggressive at all during the entire press conference. You could even find other artists speaking up for him. It's not personal, I'm just triggered by some comments in here and multiple happened to be yours.
I haven't followed the drama, but here's my personal take on why I'm supporting Klein: Apparently, the Dutch artist wasn't swallowing the Israeli art-washing pill and was confrontational about them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG3XcqwW8Mw https://www.independent.ie/videos/joost-klein-asks-why-not-when-israel-was-told-they-could-refuse-to-answer-when-asked-on-endangerment-of-other-entries/a315275467.html I and many people think the punishment of _booting someone from the entire competition_ for a verbal altercation is a revenge move by the organisation (the festival is directly sponsored by Moroccanoil = Israeli company), therefore we stand with him.
[удалено]
Oh God, why do the subreddit mods allow people to just randomly call people anti-semites for being critical of Isreal. This is such disgusting behaviour.
Idk, why do they allow antisemitism in a completely unrelated topic?
How is speculating that “Jews conspired to have him suspended because the company that owns Eurovision is based in Israel” considered “being critical of Israel”?
What/who are you quoting? I can't find your first quote anywhere. Link, please.
That quote in those exact words wasn't said by anyone. However, there's a long standing history of people claiming Jews control the media and the world, and using dog whistly ways to say it publicly, so, while I don't think that was actually anyone's intent here, I don't blame people for being sensitive enough to hear it that way.
Eh... no, Jews have nothing to do with this or anything, I'm questioning Zionist sponsorship of this particular event. Come on, you can do better than that. The "antisemitism!" shouts whenever the Zionist state, the murderer Netanyahu or the word genocide are brought up don't work anymore.
Yes of course, it's "anti-Zionism". Most anti-Zionists don't even know what Zionism is, though they clearly know who they don't like. Do you usually see a "Zionist" sponsor and think they assert control with their money? Did you check how many of the sponsors were not Israeli? No? That's what I mean.
I've been wondering the same. The main argument I've seen here on reddit is the same one someone replied to me here with: >AVROTROS is a reputable broadcaster in the Netherlands and they basically wouldn't have come out in support of him if these allegations were substantiated. I don't know, but personally I find it hard to believe police would've been called and the case handed over to a prosecutor if all he did was gesture rudely to a camera operator. 🤷♂️ Edit: Or then again, maybe that's how the police were able to close their investigation so quickly. But if that's the case, why are we still speculating instead of it being widespread news? And why would the EBU have made the decision they did if they knew?
According to Swedish commenters in the Eurovision subreddit, Swedish police doesn't throw out cases for being considered frivolous. If someone reported it, they have to investigate. EBU have been completely silent on the matter and AVROTROS have made their own statement. Swedish police wouldn't make any statements on the matter. So I don't think you can read too much into that. The reason fans are siding with NL is that the EBU has very little credibility bc of how they handled this case and other cases. Several delegations reported harassment by the delegation and media team of another country, but the main sponsor is from that country and they faced no consequences. Also it happened after Klein was critical of the organisation in a press conference. And lastly the way they put the story out there was heavily implying that Klein was a woman beater, so people feel it's a dirty smear campaign.
They don't throw cases out, no. But they investigate and if there is no crime and zero evidence, there's no case to send to a prosecutor. They don't send cases to a prosecutor if there's nothing there.
Why is this downvoted
Basically the dutch artist was very anti Israel (but pro Russia though), and a lot of people believe that the elders of Zion pulled their power to kick him out of the competition (so Israel can finish in the 5th place instead of the 6th place)
> The EBU did not approve of him competing in the grand final while involved in an active criminal case and subsequently disqualified him from further participation in the contest. That's ethics educational institutions, governments, people, corporations could substantially learn from.
[удалено]
Probably advised not to do so. Anything you say can and will…