By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 13:58 - Apr 22 by lowhouseblue
in terms of your first para, why then did the policeman consider that his obvious jewishness was a threat to order.?
how might demonstrators know his politics from the way in which he crossed the road?
i agree with your final sentence.
I can think of three likely reasons.
1. The police officer considers all the demonstrators to be a threat to Jewish people in general because of his prejudices about the people demonstrating.
2. The police officer thinks of Israel-Palestine as a kind of communal conflict between muslims and jews, and is acting to separate "them" accordingly.
3. The police officer is a bad communicator who wants to say something about the man's politics but settles on this offensive formulation.
On the second question:
The man in question is political activist who films and posts content, seems quite likely that people interested in this area of politics (ie. many of the people in the crowd) would know who he was.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 13:52 - Apr 22 by jayessess
Can't speak to this particular demonstration, but on every other large demonstration against the assault on Gaza there having been Jewish people present, some wearing kippahs or other identifiable markers of Jewishness. I've been to four such demos, 2 of the large London ones and 2 smaller local ones and seen Jewish people at all 4.
Of course, your politics might make you unwelcome at these demos, especially if your politics are militantly pro-Israel (and particularly if you're connected to the extremist movement to illegally settle the occupied territories). But in my experience police on demonstrations are usually unlikely to know that sort of detail about the people they're policing and are likely to have rather un-nuanced ideas about the "sides" involved.
Just one of many heart-warming examples validating your post, jayessess
0
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 14:45 - Apr 22 with 1260 views
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 12:35 - Apr 22 by mutters
Do you think he was known to the police before this happened? I am wondering whether they had intel in saying that he was in the area. He does have form in this type of thing
100% he was known and different police officers had a discussion with him and his entourage that day. Whether they had conveyed that to all the officers is in doubt I guess.
Still doesn't make the comment "openly jewish" any less horrific, but as I said in other posts here earlier, they knew who they were dealing with and his previous tactics at demonstrations.
Edit: Article below explaining the fuller story with the missing context not shown on the news until today.
Falter says "On Saturday 27th April — the next anti-Israel march — we are asking you, Jewish or not, to stand up for the tolerance and decency of which this country is so rightly proud, simply by going for a walk. For those who want to walk together on the 27th, we will suggest a time and location where people can meet, which we will post on our social media accounts on the 26th."
I suggest he and his supporters join the Jewish bloc in the video above. That would be an enormous stride towards reducing antisemitism in London.
0
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 15:38 - Apr 22 with 1127 views
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 14:45 - Apr 22 by ElderGrizzly
100% he was known and different police officers had a discussion with him and his entourage that day. Whether they had conveyed that to all the officers is in doubt I guess.
Still doesn't make the comment "openly jewish" any less horrific, but as I said in other posts here earlier, they knew who they were dealing with and his previous tactics at demonstrations.
Edit: Article below explaining the fuller story with the missing context not shown on the news until today.
Yes, I completely agree. My original thought was that the police were trying to defuse a situation before it became a situation, however, their heavy handiness and rubbish people skills made this into an incredibly bad and difficult situation. I wonder if that was the aim of the person. However, whatever was going on there is no valid reason for the officer to have spoken to him in this manner and used those terms.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 15:38 - Apr 22 by mutters
Yes, I completely agree. My original thought was that the police were trying to defuse a situation before it became a situation, however, their heavy handiness and rubbish people skills made this into an incredibly bad and difficult situation. I wonder if that was the aim of the person. However, whatever was going on there is no valid reason for the officer to have spoken to him in this manner and used those terms.
Certainly the Police were guilty of very clumsy (and unacceptable) language but no heavy handedness as far as I could see from the long version of Mr Falter's interaction with the Police. I think enormous tolerance and restraint were on display on this occasion. All of which suggests to me that they were fully aware of who they were dealing with and the potential for problems, but they still managed to give Mr Falter a juicy story.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 15:38 - Apr 22 by mutters
Yes, I completely agree. My original thought was that the police were trying to defuse a situation before it became a situation, however, their heavy handiness and rubbish people skills made this into an incredibly bad and difficult situation. I wonder if that was the aim of the person. However, whatever was going on there is no valid reason for the officer to have spoken to him in this manner and used those terms.
And if he wasn't wearing a skullcap he wouldn't have spoken to him like that as he probably wouldn't have a clue he was Jewish without it.
That's the point the officer has reacted to the clothing
0
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 16:10 - Apr 22 with 1014 views
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 14:45 - Apr 22 by ElderGrizzly
100% he was known and different police officers had a discussion with him and his entourage that day. Whether they had conveyed that to all the officers is in doubt I guess.
Still doesn't make the comment "openly jewish" any less horrific, but as I said in other posts here earlier, they knew who they were dealing with and his previous tactics at demonstrations.
Edit: Article below explaining the fuller story with the missing context not shown on the news until today.
I haven't been following this other than the headlines because all the confrontational, absolutist positioning really pisses me off, but I'm sure I'd be right in thinking that the word 'openly' is one of the significant factors here?
The copper came out with that word on the spur of the moment when I would assume he meant 'clearly' or 'obviously' which are just just statements of fact, whereas 'openly' has a hint of accusation about it.
I know there's more to it than that, but the fact that people on both sides don't have the flexibility and willingness to avoid petty point scoring around aspects of that type in an argument, really makes me want to not be a part of the human race any more.
# WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE #
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 15:52 - Apr 22 by BloomBlue
And if he wasn't wearing a skullcap he wouldn't have spoken to him like that as he probably wouldn't have a clue he was Jewish without it.
That's the point the officer has reacted to the clothing
Absolutely, that’s one of the points that’s likely true. And it’s a shocking state of affairs in 2024 UK (although I’m not surprised).
Also, mutters’ points are likely to be equally true. The incident could highlight inappropriate handling by the police, and they could also have been (albeit clumsily) attempting to head off a potential confrontation so ultimately well -meaning, and he could have been deliberately provocative. All these things can coexist, which is making some of the posts on here framing it from only one point of view seem a bit perverse. I can’t see how that’s helpful.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 16:12 - Apr 22 by noggin
Mob rule innit.
Perhaps a little more civility... by noggin22 Apr 12:06 What if I have the starter of the other thread on ignore then? Anyway, Phil has stopped me 'crossing the road' and I'm ok with that. Move on all you board prefects.
And yet you can see this thread and contribute to it. Oh the shame of being caught telling porkies noggers.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 16:17 - Apr 22 by Swansea_Blue
Absolutely, that’s one of the points that’s likely true. And it’s a shocking state of affairs in 2024 UK (although I’m not surprised).
Also, mutters’ points are likely to be equally true. The incident could highlight inappropriate handling by the police, and they could also have been (albeit clumsily) attempting to head off a potential confrontation so ultimately well -meaning, and he could have been deliberately provocative. All these things can coexist, which is making some of the posts on here framing it from only one point of view seem a bit perverse. I can’t see how that’s helpful.
I get the provocative point, although if the police believe an individual could be in danger because the individual was wearing a skullcap there should be some responsibility on the police to arrest those individuals who were potentially going to endanger that individual?
What is still making me smile on this topic is a few on here got upset when we had the Queen's funeral and King coronation and people standing in the crown with not my King placards and shouting were moved on by the police. They moaned about the police threatening to arrest those 'protesters' and how it was wrong that people who have a different view shouldn't be allowed to stand in a crowd and display those differences. Apparently to some on here it was a sign of fascism, and tje police were wrong. But now they are arguing an individual wearing a skullcap in a crowd with different views is provocative and the police were right to more him or even arrest him.
I guess that's the UK in 2024, stand with an anti royal placard in a pro royal crowd is allowed. Individual wearing a skullcap, which identifies him as Jewish , standing near an apparent pro Gaza crowd, not allowed.
0
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 17:03 - Apr 22 with 855 views
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 16:17 - Apr 22 by Swansea_Blue
Absolutely, that’s one of the points that’s likely true. And it’s a shocking state of affairs in 2024 UK (although I’m not surprised).
Also, mutters’ points are likely to be equally true. The incident could highlight inappropriate handling by the police, and they could also have been (albeit clumsily) attempting to head off a potential confrontation so ultimately well -meaning, and he could have been deliberately provocative. All these things can coexist, which is making some of the posts on here framing it from only one point of view seem a bit perverse. I can’t see how that’s helpful.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 16:46 - Apr 22 by BloomBlue
I get the provocative point, although if the police believe an individual could be in danger because the individual was wearing a skullcap there should be some responsibility on the police to arrest those individuals who were potentially going to endanger that individual?
What is still making me smile on this topic is a few on here got upset when we had the Queen's funeral and King coronation and people standing in the crown with not my King placards and shouting were moved on by the police. They moaned about the police threatening to arrest those 'protesters' and how it was wrong that people who have a different view shouldn't be allowed to stand in a crowd and display those differences. Apparently to some on here it was a sign of fascism, and tje police were wrong. But now they are arguing an individual wearing a skullcap in a crowd with different views is provocative and the police were right to more him or even arrest him.
I guess that's the UK in 2024, stand with an anti royal placard in a pro royal crowd is allowed. Individual wearing a skullcap, which identifies him as Jewish , standing near an apparent pro Gaza crowd, not allowed.
Given that plenty of people have attended these demonstrations wearing kippahs (or even with signs declaring their Jewishness, giving platform speeches that reference their heritage etc.), it would be pretty bizarre for the police to start arresting demonstrators on the unproven (and self-evidently ridiculous) presumption that the sight of a kippah will provoke them to violence.
It is a long-standing police practice to keep demonstrators and counter-demonstrators separate (for e.g. fascist marches and the policing of anti-fascist counter-protesters) to avoid the two sides beating each other up. That's slightly different from people choosing to protest a formal state function (well, it should be, but actually in practice it isn't, the police routinely pre-arrest people to protect state functions).
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 16:46 - Apr 22 by BloomBlue
I get the provocative point, although if the police believe an individual could be in danger because the individual was wearing a skullcap there should be some responsibility on the police to arrest those individuals who were potentially going to endanger that individual?
What is still making me smile on this topic is a few on here got upset when we had the Queen's funeral and King coronation and people standing in the crown with not my King placards and shouting were moved on by the police. They moaned about the police threatening to arrest those 'protesters' and how it was wrong that people who have a different view shouldn't be allowed to stand in a crowd and display those differences. Apparently to some on here it was a sign of fascism, and tje police were wrong. But now they are arguing an individual wearing a skullcap in a crowd with different views is provocative and the police were right to more him or even arrest him.
I guess that's the UK in 2024, stand with an anti royal placard in a pro royal crowd is allowed. Individual wearing a skullcap, which identifies him as Jewish , standing near an apparent pro Gaza crowd, not allowed.
That's quite a leap. I'd certainly have no problem if he was standing there holding a placard in a peaceful protest. The two aren't comparable, as for a start he wasn't arrested and doesn't seem to have been threatened with arrest (it's he who says '"If I want to walk to that pavement that is what I am going to do and you are going to have to arrest me". To which the officer replies "I would rather not do that". And then the officer offers to walk him around to the other side to avoid the crowds). So yes, arresting peaceful protestors isn't a good look. Not arresting someone who's looking for conflict whilst also offering to help them is obviously much better behaviour from the police.
The full Sky News video is quite an interesting watch. I'm not especially keen on defending the Met, as these are the people who happily knelt on young women holding a peaceful vigil for another young woman murdered by one of the Met's own. But in this case, I'm struggling to see what the officer could have done differently that would have appeased this Falter guy.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 16:12 - Apr 22 by NthQldITFC
I haven't been following this other than the headlines because all the confrontational, absolutist positioning really pisses me off, but I'm sure I'd be right in thinking that the word 'openly' is one of the significant factors here?
The copper came out with that word on the spur of the moment when I would assume he meant 'clearly' or 'obviously' which are just just statements of fact, whereas 'openly' has a hint of accusation about it.
I know there's more to it than that, but the fact that people on both sides don't have the flexibility and willingness to avoid petty point scoring around aspects of that type in an argument, really makes me want to not be a part of the human race any more.
You're quite right. In the context of that march he would have been 'easily identifiable' or 'clearly identifiable' or 'obviously' Jewish, if anyone wanted to cause any grief. An easy target. There's no evidence that anyone did want to single him out of course. So I suppose there's a case for arguing the police were too cautious? Trouble is, if they knew of a potential flashpoint, did noting to prevent it developing and then there was a problem, all hell would break loose. Damned if they do, damned if they don't on this one I suspect.
I suspect 90% of the police's stubbornness and why the conversation went on for nearly a quarter of an hour was because the bloke was being a pain in the arse. But then it's his job to be, as he's an activist.
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 17:34 - Apr 22 by Swansea_Blue
You're quite right. In the context of that march he would have been 'easily identifiable' or 'clearly identifiable' or 'obviously' Jewish, if anyone wanted to cause any grief. An easy target. There's no evidence that anyone did want to single him out of course. So I suppose there's a case for arguing the police were too cautious? Trouble is, if they knew of a potential flashpoint, did noting to prevent it developing and then there was a problem, all hell would break loose. Damned if they do, damned if they don't on this one I suspect.
I suspect 90% of the police's stubbornness and why the conversation went on for nearly a quarter of an hour was because the bloke was being a pain in the arse. But then it's his job to be, as he's an activist.
But don't his own oft-repeated claims about these protests being full of 'anti-Israel/anti-Jewish hate mobs' justify the Met's concerns about his safety here?
I agree that there's no evidence that anyone was looking to single him out, but given his previous assertions would suggest that he would feel at significant personal risk at such events, why would he be so desperate to cross the road at that particular point, and so keen to refuse the officer's offer of an escort to a safer crossing point?
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 17:57 - Apr 22 by Zx1988
But don't his own oft-repeated claims about these protests being full of 'anti-Israel/anti-Jewish hate mobs' justify the Met's concerns about his safety here?
I agree that there's no evidence that anyone was looking to single him out, but given his previous assertions would suggest that he would feel at significant personal risk at such events, why would he be so desperate to cross the road at that particular point, and so keen to refuse the officer's offer of an escort to a safer crossing point?
I think that is reasonably obvious.
As an aside, back in the day, did people ridicule and/or dive into the history and motives of climate protestors and BLM activists, etc…and try and discredit them that way,….anyhoo…
If the proposition is: it is somewhere between feeling nervous, being unpleasant, or being at risk of assault, for Jewish people during these marches. Then to show this, you could walk around, whilst gathering data.
On this forum we have seen some people state they aren’t really impressed with the stats on assaults and hate crimes. So they would welcome evidence gathering, surely?
As it turns out, this chap was verbally abused and threatened, whilst interacting with the Met Police. And the Met Police, even though they saw him walking about in the crowd, thought it was potentially dangerous for him to carry on. If he was doing something against the law, they could arrest him for that.
What was in evidence was a Jewish person, near police, with cameras rolling, and with men in sunglasses nearby, was verbally abused. That probably won’t worry some people too much.
But, is that evidence of an issue that faces Jewish people during these protests?
0
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 18:51 - Apr 22 with 587 views
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 16:18 - Apr 22 by GlasgowBlue
Perhaps a little more civility... by noggin22 Apr 12:06 What if I have the starter of the other thread on ignore then? Anyway, Phil has stopped me 'crossing the road' and I'm ok with that. Move on all you board prefects.
And yet you can see this thread and contribute to it. Oh the shame of being caught telling porkies noggers.
strange that….
0
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 19:22 - Apr 22 with 503 views
Threatened with arrest for being openly Jewish on the streets of London on 18:46 - Apr 22 by eireblue
I think that is reasonably obvious.
As an aside, back in the day, did people ridicule and/or dive into the history and motives of climate protestors and BLM activists, etc…and try and discredit them that way,….anyhoo…
If the proposition is: it is somewhere between feeling nervous, being unpleasant, or being at risk of assault, for Jewish people during these marches. Then to show this, you could walk around, whilst gathering data.
On this forum we have seen some people state they aren’t really impressed with the stats on assaults and hate crimes. So they would welcome evidence gathering, surely?
As it turns out, this chap was verbally abused and threatened, whilst interacting with the Met Police. And the Met Police, even though they saw him walking about in the crowd, thought it was potentially dangerous for him to carry on. If he was doing something against the law, they could arrest him for that.
What was in evidence was a Jewish person, near police, with cameras rolling, and with men in sunglasses nearby, was verbally abused. That probably won’t worry some people too much.
But, is that evidence of an issue that faces Jewish people during these protests?
Yeah so that data would only be valid for people walking around with security details, that refer to you as being part of a hate mob and promote right wing settler groups in Israel.....so pretty limited really and he seemed to be having trouble getting the reaction he wanted......but anyhooooo.....
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
