Had the gesture been anti-semitic without a shadow of a doubt, Anelka would have been banned for life, like that young Greek player who showed a Nazi salute. Pleading ignorance after the fact didn't help him one bit, because the meaning of a Nazi salute is fairly unambiguous. So I think it's not really "brushing anti-semitism under the rug," it's just with quenelle there is some doubt whether the gesture is always anti-semitic. There is no question that people who pose doing quenelle at Auschwitz and the like are making an anti-semitic statement. But it's certainly possible that some people, in fact most people, genuinely think of it as some "fuck the power" sign and use to express exactly that sentiment.
For me it's the intended meaning is what counts, not the gesture or the symbol itself. For instance swastika is more than OK on the roof of a Buddhist temple; I've seen many while traveling in Asia. The symbol itself is not evil, but people certainly can use it in evil ways. By the same token, if somebody poses with quenelle at Auschwitz, for me that's not much different from a Nazi salute – it doesn't matter if the gesture is different if the meaning is roughly the same.
Of course this ambiguity is by design; this Dieudonne is a fairly smart guy and he knows this gesture would not spread among the general public if everybody viewed is a purely anti-semitic, while people who intend to use it in anti-semitic way need plausible deniability. I think banning the gesture would be stupid and counterproductive. The solution is simple: people who use it in an ambiguous way should be asked to explain what they meant. If, like Anelka, they say they meant no offense, believe them. Just make sure they are aware of the other, potentially offensive meaning.
