EXCLUSIVE Macfarlanes apologises for external speaker’s unplanned remarks about Palestine

_{The talks on Companies House filings never got this exciting.}

Macfarlanes has apologised to staff after an external speaker went off-piste while talking about his experiences during World War 2.

To mark Holocaust Memorial Day, Macfarlanes held an event with a guest speaker from the Holocaust Educational Trust (HET), whom ROF is not naming.

The talk was “very interesting to start with”, said a source, as the speaker, who is in his 90s, described being interned by the Nazis in a concentration camp where he worked as slave labour until he was liberated in 1945.

Things “took a turn for the worse” when he strayed outside the talk's remit and expounded on current events, referring to pro-Palestine protesters as “mobs” who were “all refugees who weren’t even born here” and had been “brainwashed by social media”.

“Be careful of these Islamists… these lot are coming for you and British democracy once they are done with us”, he allegedly also said, claiming that “All these wealthy Arabs are funding these universities which are brainwashing people”.

A source said that “People sat and listened throughout but afterwards quite a few attendees were visibly upset”.

Now the firm has issued an apology, emailing Macs staff to say that “Towards the end of the session, [the speaker] made unplanned comments expressing his personal views about the contemporary political landscape and used some offensive language”.

“These comments came as a surprise to both the firm and the Holocaust Educational Trust. They do not reflect the firm's view and we apologise for the offence and hurt which we know was caused by this”, it said.

Macs isn't the first firm to encounter heated remarks and heightened sensitivities around the subject. Winston & Strawn rescinded a job offer, while JMW Solicitors went bananas after indiscreet comments were leaked to ROF.

LU icon Firms ping LawyerUp when they like you for a role. It's available on the App Store and Google Play.

Comments

Can't believe I feel sorry for Macs. A rare and unpleasant sensation.

Dare wonder what it feels like to be a minority there and what their Muslim or Middle Eastern clients would think when they see these comments.

'Diversity champions', do you have issues with reading comprehension? Minorities and Muslim clients will see that it was an external speaker (ie nothing to to do with the firm), and that Macs also apologised for his remarks, and rightly conclude that, in this instance, the firm did nothing wrong.

He was an external speaker who made unplanned remarks. Keep your smears off rof, diversity champions 09:18

A source said that “People sat and listened throughout but afterwards quite a few attendees were visibly upset”.

But not at the concentration camps bit? Interesting.

Such a shame that the external speaker, given their background, made such divisive comments.

This is the value of victimhood. It allows you to say anything.

Note to the Palestine protesters!

Poor old Macs. You try and do a nice thing…

“Be careful of these Islamists… these lot are coming for you and British democracy once they are done with us” - Just to help me understand the problem with this statement, which bit of it is incorrect? Is it wrong to say that Islamists are in fact opposed to the concepts of (a) what the majority of British citizens consider British values to be (we can start with the role of women in society, perhaps), and/or (b) the desirability of Democracy as a form of governance? Have I seriously misunderstood what ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Boko Haram et al stand for and what they mean when they call for a global caliphate run under Sharia Law as set out in the Quran? Do they actually blow up all of those buses, Christmas markets and Ariana Grande concerts because they wanted more British democracy not less? Please, help me to understand what the issue is here? I worry that I've been understanding this global Jihad thing all wrong...

@Scep Tick

Give it a rest. No doubt people were upset about hearing about the concentration camps but the focus here is on the present discriminatory remarks. No need to deflect from that.

If you were an associate, and when the speaker made these remarks, you stood up and challenged him, would they fire you?

How do you not see the problem with this. It’s like saying “Jews control xyz, etc.”. It’s offensive.

You’re also conflating ordinary Muslims, Islamists and terrorists (it’s worse that you have named some rather nasty terrorist groups).

Just remember, the vast majority of Muslims strongly oppose of those terrorist groups, it’s just you only hear or see the actions of extremists and you have to resist the belief that what you hear/see represents everyone.

"If you were an associate, and when the speaker made these remarks, you stood up and challenged him, would they fire you?" - I think it probably depends on which bit you were going to challenge, doesn't it?

Like, if you said "Actually, I think that you will find that Islamists are ardent supporters of British Democracy!", or maybe something like "No! I'm sure that wealthy Arabs just give money to universities out of the goodness of their hearts and have no intention of influencing University policy in any way!" or perhaps even a "Stop right there! Social Media could never brainwash anyone! I sincerely doubt that Hamas are spending any of their billions trying to influence global public opinion by publishing misleading propaganda about the conflict in Gaza online! They seem far too moral for that!" ... well then yes Mac's probably would fire you, because it would be self-evident that you were a complete moron.

"Just remember, the vast majority of Muslims strongly oppose of those terrorist groups, it’s just you only hear or see the actions of extremists" - Oh yes. Of course. They definitely oppose it. Of course they do! They just never feel any particular need to say or do anything to indicate that. And even if they did, they're far too busy going on marches to shout about Gaza. Again. So where would they even find the time anyway? And their marching quota is all used up for the year now (until the next time Israel does anything or someone looks at the Quran funny in a school). But definitely don't read anything into their perpetual stony silence about atrocities committed by Muslims in the name of Islam. They're definitely not supporters of that global Jihad stuff that Islamist terrorists do. Oh no.

"How do you not see the problem with this. It’s like saying “Jews control xyz, etc.”. It’s offensive. You’re also conflating ordinary Muslims, Islamists and terrorists" - No. It's not like that at all. The speaker, and the poster you are responding to, both very clearly said Islamists. It's entirely right to say that Islamists are opposed to British values and the concept of democracy. It's what makes them Islamists. We don't have to pretend that they're ok, or that they're harmless, they literally kill people in the name of their beliefs. It's not a conspiracy theory, it has happened repeatedly here in the UK. If hearing that truth about Islamists upsets 'regular' muslims then that's their problem. Indeed, they might want to ask themselves why hearing that set of truths offends them so much. After all, they do oppose Islamists too... don't they?

The statement says that the speaker ‘used some offensive language’. Incorrect. The speaker use some language that some in the audience may have found offensive.

Maybe Mac’s should get Mr Gervais in to explain the difference…

Using the term 'Islamist' is now a very clever albeit trite way for the Far-Right to disguise their Islamophobic attacks. Lee Anderson also used 'Islamist', as do Tommy Robinson, Geert Wilders, Orban, Trump, Putin, Itamar Ben Gvir and others.

I didn't see that coming.

And British liberal democracy is hardly an unalloyed paradise. It hasn’t come to terms with past British crimes:

Churchill caused the Bengal famine which killed 4 million people: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

Churchill said racist things about Hindus and created Pakistan.

The British gifted precious Kashmir to Pakistan:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Brown_(British_Army_officer)

"Using the term 'Islamist' is now a very clever albeit trite way for the Far-Right to disguise their Islamophobic attacks." - Oh I'm so so sorry. What's the new Guardianista approved term that I should use to describe the kind of Muslim who cheers the idea of people blowing themselves up on public transport while shouting Allahu Akbar? I wouldn't want to offend anyone by using the wrong word now. That's the important issue here.

@Anonymous 01 March 24 11:05

There is no widely used definition of “Islamist”. Your post says “[Islamists] literally kill people in the name of their beliefs”. That is the act of a terrorist but now, as you demonstrate, there seems to be a push by a vocal minority to call them Islamists instead, which puts Islam in a bad light.

”Indeed, they might want to ask themselves why hearing that set of truths offends them so much. After all, they do oppose Islamists too... don't they?” - Childish gaslighting.

You don’t need to use a term. Just take the knee!!! Take the knee immediately !!! And in a totally heartfelt and genuine way! And also without tearing your trousers (as it shows you’re considerate enough to practise the gesture so as not to damage clothes)!!!
Your children and grandchildren will take the knee!!!

Who are these "The British" & "British" crimes. Why is it somehow acceptable to conflate the actions of long dead imperialists from a state without univeral suffrage and attribute them to people not even born at the time events took place? The majority of people in this country had nothing to do with those events and no power to stop them. It's racist blood libel to suggest otherwise.

"That is the act of a terrorist but now, as you demonstrate, there seems to be a push by a vocal minority to call them Islamists instead, which puts Islam in a bad light." - Islamists is the word that people use to describe people who call for terrorism in the name of Islam. I'm surprised this is new information to you. Islamist terrorists are a common phenomena (80% of people convicted of terrorism in the UK are muslims) and the terminology isn't in anyway niche or unusual. If you think the fact that Islamist terrorists shout Allahu Akbar as they pull the trigger, and justify their actions by reference to specific sections of the Quran, 'puts Islam in a bad light' then that is probably something you should complain to them about rather than trying to play some kind of semantic parlour game with me. I'm not going to pretend that muslim extremists are nothing to do with Islam just to spare your feelings.

Major Brown’s criminal actions took place when Elizabeth II was queen. He reported to Viceroy Mountbatten, King Charles’ favourite uncle. Even today the British have not apologised for Major Brown’s crimes.

"Why is it somehow acceptable to conflate the actions of long dead imperialists from a state without univeral suffrage and attribute them to people not even born at the time events took place?" - Yes, I do wonder how keen muslims are going to be about this mass-murdering imperialists of history game when we start doing the crimes of their forebears.

Hindus never invaded others. But the British imperialists looted India and Major Brown handed over Kashmir to Pakistan.

Plenty of odious racists showing their true colours in this comments thread. 10.59 in particular sounds like an absolute gimpstick.

@Tunocks - Yes, I agree! It's very unfair of them to point out that British muslims seem to have an infinite amount of energy to wave Palestine flags, picket schools for showing Charlie Hebdo cartoons, and to call for the death of Salman Rushdie; but never seem to be able to match that energy to engage in any kind of audible protest about murders committed by fellow muslims from their own communities. It's totally unfair to suggest that this indicates that they don't actually care about, and possibly even feel quiet support for, the stuff that those Islamists do.

From the description, I have seen the speaker at another HET event, where they made similar comments.

Their experiences are unimaginable and their story is important.

The HET needs to take more responsibility for this - they allowed the HMD event I attended to stray into current politics away from a memorial. As someone who was there to memorialise family members, felt distasteful at the time.

There's a danger they will undo the amazing educational work they do.

“I think it probably depends on which bit you were going to challenge, doesn't it?”

Erm perhaps the bit about generalising that people that look a certain way are “all refugees”.

Maybe the blindfolds need to come off?

@anonymous 13:56 - that you're thick enough to lump British Muslims together as though they're one homogeneous hive-minded blob is a worrying indictment of the profession today. Tell yourself you're not a racist all you want, but the rest of us see you.

@Anonymous 01 March 24 13:56

Funny how people with your views tend to make daft comments as well (and it’s clear many of these posts are yours).

The truth hurts

We need to liberate London from the Tory far-right rule. Londoners will not be ruled by Lee Anderson and others who destroyed the London economy with Brexit.

We need an independent Republic of London with Diane Abbott as President of the Republic, with our own London Parliament and London Currency (London Dollar).

Comrades of the Republic of London! Let us seek the freedom that is our due! Let us liberate ourselves from racism and majoritarianism!