FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > IDF terrorist
IDF terrorist
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. " You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. " Two babies, 12 other children under the age of 10, 36 civilians aged 10-19, and 25 elderly people over the age of 80, accounting for 75 of the 764 civilians as Hamas killed indiscriminately in streets, houses, kibbutz communities and at a rave music _estival on the night of October 7th. A Bedouin woman at the tail end of her pregnancy was shot in the abdomen while heading to the hospital to give birth, where doctors delivered the baby, but failed to save it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Even before Oct. 7, was one of the most violent years in Palestine in more than a decade. At least 247 Palestinian including 47 children had been killed by Israeli soldiers(terrorists) and settlers before the end of September. During the same period, Israeli settlers launched over 800 attacks on Palestinians and Palestinian-owned property. Additionally, over 1,100 Palestinians had been forcibly displaced from their homes. 34,151 Palestinians have been killed and 77,084 wounded in Israeli attacks on Gaza since October 7. More than 13,800 children have been killed in Gaza and 113 in the West Bank, and over 12,009 children have been injured in Gaza and at least 725 children in the West Bank, that’s One Palestinian child killed every 15 minutes, or about one out of every 100 children in the Gaza Strip according to the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs." How many Israelis have been killed by terrorist attacks? Don't all children's lives matter? More children killed in Syria in their civil war, by Syrians, in the last couple of years than by Israelis, during all their conflict since 1948. No comments on Muslims killing Muslim children? Almost 700,000 innocents killed there. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. " Hamas microwaved a baby Next | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. Hamas microwaved a baby Next " Hamas killed three times as many innocents in one night than Israel allegedly killed in 9 months. And they did burn babies alive. It's about as barbaric as you can get. The are the real terrorists, IDF are soldiers. It may be a terrible campaign but they are just soldiers. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You forgot about the babies they burnt to death, Mrs x" This proven to be Isreali propoganda, stop these repeated lies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. Hamas microwaved a baby Next Hamas killed three times as many innocents in one night than Israel allegedly killed in 9 months. And they did burn babies alive. It's about as barbaric as you can get. The are the real terrorists, IDF are soldiers. It may be a terrible campaign but they are just soldiers. Mrs x" They are both soldiers and terrorists and you support terrorism with your double standards | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You forgot about the babies they burnt to death, Mrs x This proven to be Isreali propoganda, stop these repeated lies " I gave you 3 reputable sources, links, the lot and you still say it's propaganda. You've either not watched them or your just hate to admit Hamas did anything wrong. Just so everyone know, two of those sources included France24, the renowned news channel and the Arlington Post, a world renowned paper. So stop saying propaganda and check it out. And these are impartial sources too, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. Hamas microwaved a baby Next Hamas killed three times as many innocents in one night than Israel allegedly killed in 9 months. And they did burn babies alive. It's about as barbaric as you can get. The are the real terrorists, IDF are soldiers. It may be a terrible campaign but they are just soldiers. Mrs x They are both soldiers and terrorists and you support terrorism with your double standards " Haha your joking. Read what I write, I said I didn't necessarily agree with how Israel is conducting the war but because I don't agree with that doesn't mean Israels soldiers are terrorists. It's like me calling you a terrorist because you saw action in Bosnia and the Middle East. Do you consider yourself and your squaddie mates terrorists? I doubt you do and I don't think you are but some might. Hamas commit terrorist attacks, they deliberately killed woman, children and burnt babies. That's terrorism. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You forgot about the babies they burnt to death, Mrs x This proven to be Isreali propoganda, stop these repeated lies I gave you 3 reputable sources, links, the lot and you still say it's propaganda. You've either not watched them or your just hate to admit Hamas did anything wrong. Just so everyone know, two of those sources included France24, the renowned news channel and the Arlington Post, a world renowned paper. So stop saying propaganda and check it out. And these are impartial sources too, Mrs x" Where did the original source of these lies come from? I'll tell you! The propoganda agency employed by the israili government! Why? To detract from atrocities bring committed by the IDF in Gaza! Including starving people to death Which you support! That's why! Isreal told the USA that irag had nuclear weapons to goad America into invading Iraq. Now they come up with the 40 babies utter shite story and mugs swallow this crap hook line and sinker! I say again.. STOP lying! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One Zaka volunteer spoke on October of children with their "hands tied in the back, shot and burned" in Beeri." This was later verified by independent sources who said instead of 11 children quoted by the Zaka volunteer, that they counted 9. Does it matter? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You forgot about the babies they burnt to death, Mrs x This proven to be Isreali propoganda, stop these repeated lies I gave you 3 reputable sources, links, the lot and you still say it's propaganda. You've either not watched them or your just hate to admit Hamas did anything wrong. Just so everyone know, two of those sources included France24, the renowned news channel and the Arlington Post, a world renowned paper. So stop saying propaganda and check it out. And these are impartial sources too, Mrs x Where did the original source of these lies come from? I'll tell you! The propoganda agency employed by the israili government! Why? To detract from atrocities bring committed by the IDF in Gaza! Including starving people to death Which you support! That's why! Isreal told the USA that irag had nuclear weapons to goad America into invading Iraq. Now they come up with the 40 babies utter shite story and mugs swallow this crap hook line and sinker! I say again.. STOP lying!" I am not saying they are genuine, these impartial, internationally renowned news outlets are. And they are not the only ones. So just so you know the background to the story. Initially the photos of the burnt babies were released by the Israeli government. That's because the pics were taken on scene by the authorities. So gut on Twitter said he could manipulate the image and it mat not be true. He subsequently manipulated it and replaced the charred corpse with an image of the puppy. He made a believable image. Twitter users then said that the puppy image was the genuine one, despite the guy who posted the puppy image saying it wasn't genuine. However it went viral and that's the origin of Israel releasing fake images, even though it's clear from the original poster that the puppy image was his work, was false, and had nothing to do with Israel. So news agencies around the world picked up on this to see if they could authenticate the original burnt baby pics. They used the leading scientific equipment, processes and a world leading digital image processing firm to gain the results. All this done from independent sources. The results came back and it was proven that the original pics of the burnt babies were genuine. Now that would leave two possibilities. One that Israel burnt their own babies to gain some sort of propagandist leverage against Hamas, or two Hamas, an internationally recognised terror organisation, actually burnt babies alive as part of their terror campaign and Israel were telling the truth. Don't take my words for any of this. Read The Arlington Post, look ar the news reports from France24. Just don't take your news from Twitter, Oh and do you consider yourself a terrorist? you didnt reply to that but then againyou never do, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Isreal employ a group called zaka. That fabricate shite on behalf of isreal. Classic tactic. Play the victim, inflate hamas attacks, flagrantly break international law, and desicrate the memory of those who died in the haulocaust to further their sick and evil ideology they shove onto moderate Jews who incidentally are demonstrating against this evil regime in Israel " Zaka is a paramedic group. You mean this Zaka? Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hamas are definitely not soldiers, what they have done over the years is absolutely disgusting. But it's the innocent civilians on both sides that are the ones that are getting hurt in this" That's absolutely true but only one side planned for this and wants this, so they can use the obvious international outrage that was to follow for their benefit. The loss of innocent civilian lives is a tactic employed by Hamas, they want and to some point need this. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion." No I don’t  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t "You're right, you don't. Everyone knows Hamas is a terrorist organisation. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t "There are enough sick people in this world who won’t see the suffering of innocent Palestinians and disagree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t
There are enough sick people in this world who won’t see the suffering of innocent Palestinians and disagree. "I don't like to see suffering on either side, what about you, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t You're right, you don't. Everyone knows Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
Mrs x"US plans to sanction IDF terrorists battalion Netzah Yahuda and considering other battalions for terrorist activities in Gaza and West Bank. IDF is no different to ISIS  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t You're right, you don't. Everyone knows Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
Mrs x
US plans to sanction IDF terrorists battalion Netzah Yahuda and considering other battalions for terrorist activities in Gaza and West Bank. IDF is no different to ISIS "Fundamentally different. They are soldiers ISIS are terrorists. IDF don't throw gayguys off building to their deaths. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. Hamas microwaved a baby Next Hamas killed three times as many innocents in one night than Israel allegedly killed in 9 months. And they did burn babies alive. It's about as barbaric as you can get. The are the real terrorists, IDF are soldiers. It may be a terrible campaign but they are just soldiers. Mrs x" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. They are the real terrorist. It’s about as barbaric as you can get. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t You're right, you don't. Everyone knows Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
Mrs x
US plans to sanction IDF terrorists battalion Netzah Yahuda and considering other battalions for terrorist activities in Gaza and West Bank. IDF is no different to ISIS "One of the main cases against this battalion is that a 78 year old Palestinian died of a heart attack after allegedly being 'manhandled', which is the description from the allegations against the accused. Whilst a tragedy, and being wrong, manhandling one individual is not on the same scale of barbarism as beheading prisoners and burning babies alive. I think it's objectively clear we're your sympathies lie and I'd say it was towards the terrorist groups of the Middle East. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. Hamas microwaved a baby Next Hamas killed three times as many innocents in one night than Israel allegedly killed in 9 months. And they did burn babies alive. It's about as barbaric as you can get. The are the real terrorists, IDF are soldiers. It may be a terrible campaign but they are just soldiers. Mrs x Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. They are the real terrorist. It’s about as barbaric as you can get." WRONG, more innocents killed in Syria, by Arabs, during the war therethan teetotal number killed, including combatants and civilians, in all of the conflicts Iarael have been involved in since 1948. Deaths in Syria stands at over 700,000 thousands. You're not condemning that because if you did you'd have to be condemning Muslims because Jews weren't in that conflict. More than 20 times the number of deaths in this current conflict. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One Zaka volunteer spoke on October of children with their "hands tied in the back, shot and burned" in Beeri." Then he changed his story on live Tv when confronted by sky reporters. He said they might be 18/20 years old. The beheaded babies tale originated with a report on Israel’s i24News site by reporter Nicole Zedeck, from her interview with Israeli reserve soldier David Ben Zion. Max Blumenthal and Alexander Rubinstein reported on October 11 that Ben Zion is a notorious radical leader in Israel’s West Bank settler movement. Among other things, he called on rampaging armed settlers earlier this year to wipe out the Palestinian village of Harawa, which settlers attacked and burned several times. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One Zaka volunteer spoke on October of children with their "hands tied in the back, shot and burned" in Beeri. Then he changed his story on live Tv when confronted by sky reporters. He said they might be 18/20 years old. The beheaded babies tale originated with a report on Israel’s i24News site by reporter Nicole Zedeck, from her interview with Israeli reserve soldier David Ben Zion. Max Blumenthal and Alexander Rubinstein reported on October 11 that Ben Zion is a notorious radical leader in Israel’s West Bank settler movement. Among other things, he called on rampaging armed settlers earlier this year to wipe out the Palestinian village of Harawa, which settlers attacked and burned several times." That story may be false, however the burnt baby one isn't. And do you condemn the slaughtered innocents in Syria and if you do which group are culpable for the killing of the innocents there? Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t
There are enough sick people in this world who won’t see the suffering of innocent Palestinians and disagree. I don't like to see suffering on either side, what about you,
Mrs x"Really. Do you condemn the killing of innocent women and children in Gaza in recent months by IDF terrorists or you think no one is Gaza is innocent which most Israelis believe? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. Hamas microwaved a baby Next Hamas killed three times as many innocents in one night than Israel allegedly killed in 9 months. And they did burn babies alive. It's about as barbaric as you can get. The are the real terrorists, IDF are soldiers. It may be a terrible campaign but they are just soldiers. Mrs x Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. They are the real terrorist. It’s about as barbaric as you can get." You're quite deluded. You keep saying IDF are terrorists, they aren't by any definition. It's just a label you attach to try and justify your belief. Secondly your numbers are very selective. No argument. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. " Just do one !!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You're quite deluded. You keep saying IDF are terrorists, they aren't by any definition. " Good point, you wouldn't want to mislabel person or group who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims as "terrorists". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t
There are enough sick people in this world who won’t see the suffering of innocent Palestinians and disagree. I don't like to see suffering on either side, what about you,
Mrs x
Really. Do you condemn the killing of innocent women and children in Gaza in recent months by IDF terrorists or you think no one is Gaza is innocent which most Israelis believe?"Go read what I've written. I deplore the loss of any innocent lives. However IDF are soldiers not terrorists. Hamas are terrorists. They comitted murder on Oct 7th. Killing woman and children and burning babies. That's terrorism because they deliberately set out to do that. The IDF do not do that deliberately but it may occur as a result of their orders. And yes don't agree with it but it's not terrorism. Has that made my position clear for you? Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You're quite deluded. You keep saying IDF are terrorists, they aren't by any definition. Good point, you wouldn't want to mislabel person or group who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims as "terrorists"." So every IDF soldier supports one political party? Because if they don't how are their actions for political gain? Opposition parties in Israel are openly protesting the war. You see that what happens in a democracy, peaceful political protests. They don't behead, throw off roofs, burn to death or fly planes into sky scrappers. That's terrorism, surely. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There will always be tragedies in war. When the stated aim of Hamas is to wipe Israel off the face of the planet and they illustrate that aim with acts of terror, culminating in Oct 7th, what do you think Israel should have done? What’s interesting is when everyone talks about the so-called ‘open air prison’ of Gaza, they fail to mention the huge walls built by Egypt on their border with Gaza. I wonder why fellow Muslims would feel the need to do this?" Might be because Eygpthates Iran more than Israel but cannot openly say so forgear ofa religious backlash. People have conveniently forgotten the thousands of Palestinians Jordan kicked out of their country. Jordan 'not so secretly' hates Iran too. So Palestinian terrorist groups, funded by Iran are a touchy subject for certain Muslim countries too. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You're quite deluded. You keep saying IDF are terrorists, they aren't by any definition. Good point, you wouldn't want to mislabel person or group who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims as "terrorists". So every IDF soldier supports one political party? " I'll reply to your questions unless you start the stupid personal insults again. My answer to this question. No idea. " Because if they don't how are their actions for political gain? " I would assume they're acting under instructions that come from the Israeli government. " Opposition parties in Israel are openly protesting the war. You see that what happens in a democracy, peaceful political protests. They don't behead, throw off roofs, burn to death or fly planes into sky scrappers. That's terrorism, surely. Mrs x" I'm not saying Hamas aren't a terrorist organisation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When have I insulted you? " In one of the other many thread on this topic. I forget which one. " They are following the orders other army. In most democracies these armies are apolitical. Meaning that subsequent governments can rely on the support of their armed forces and not be subjected to a military coup should the military feel its objectives are not being met. So as for political aims, the military shouldn't get involved. Look at Labour and the Iraq War. We fought the war because the government of the day, Labour, were told about Weapons of Mass Destruction. They were wrong but the war happened anyway. Whatever political aims the Labour Party had proved disastrous and led to them losing power. It's a very risky statergy to go to war on these grounds. The soldiers weren't kick out because they just followed their orders and when the new government came in they followed theirs. To describe individual soldiers as terrorist because you don't agree with tactics, targets or level of response is disingenuous. You may be saying that Hamas are a terrorist group but you are morethan implying that the IDF are too and that's just not right. We're the British squaddies terrorist when they killed Iraqis after finding out their reason for being their was based upon lies? I don't think you would believe that and that's why I believe calling IDF soldiers terrorists or their actions as terrorism is wrong. Please have a ceasefire, please stop the deaths of all innocents but please stop calling ordinary IDF soldiers terrorist and their actions terrorism. Hamas are the terrorists not the IDF. Mrs x " I'll be honest, I don't really care which word is used to describe the mass killings of Palestinian civilians by the IDF. They seem to fit the dictionary definition of "terrorism". But if people are upset by that we can use a different word? The point that's being highlighted is that Hamas (rightly) get criticised for what they did. Yet the IDF (who have killed way more civilians) get a free pass because it's possible to argue that the word "terrorism" isn't appropriate to describe them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t You're right, you don't. Everyone knows Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
Mrs x
US plans to sanction IDF terrorists battalion Netzah Yahuda and considering other battalions for terrorist activities in Gaza and West Bank. IDF is no different to ISIS Fundamentally different. They are soldiers ISIS are terrorists. IDF don't throw gayguys off building to their deaths.
Mrs x"IDF may not throw gay guys off the buildings but they steal organs from dead Palestinian. Destroy every single school, university and hospital in Gaza. Drop 2000 pounds bomb on civilians, starve the population and drive 2 million of them away from their land and destroy their homes in the name of evil religious ideology. Definitely a terrorists army. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When have I insulted you? In one of the other many thread on this topic. I forget which one. They are following the orders other army. In most democracies these armies are apolitical. Meaning that subsequent governments can rely on the support of their armed forces and not be subjected to a military coup should the military feel its objectives are not being met. So as for political aims, the military shouldn't get involved. Look at Labour and the Iraq War. We fought the war because the government of the day, Labour, were told about Weapons of Mass Destruction. They were wrong but the war happened anyway. Whatever political aims the Labour Party had proved disastrous and led to them losing power. It's a very risky statergy to go to war on these grounds. The soldiers weren't kick out because they just followed their orders and when the new government came in they followed theirs. To describe individual soldiers as terrorist because you don't agree with tactics, targets or level of response is disingenuous. You may be saying that Hamas are a terrorist group but you are morethan implying that the IDF are too and that's just not right. We're the British squaddies terrorist when they killed Iraqis after finding out their reason for being their was based upon lies? I don't think you would believe that and that's why I believe calling IDF soldiers terrorists or their actions as terrorism is wrong. Please have a ceasefire, please stop the deaths of all innocents but please stop calling ordinary IDF soldiers terrorist and their actions terrorism. Hamas are the terrorists not the IDF. Mrs x I'll be honest, I don't really care which word is used to describe the mass killings of Palestinian civilians by the IDF. They seem to fit the dictionary definition of "terrorism". But if people are upset by that we can use a different word? The point that's being highlighted is that Hamas (rightly) get criticised for what they did. Yet the IDF (who have killed way more civilians) get a free pass because it's possible to argue that the word "terrorism" isn't appropriate to describe them." But that's not the case Hamas are murdering innocent civilians. The actual legal definition involves the unlawful killing, of a reasoning being, with malice forethought. Think it was define by LCJ Coke in the 1700s. Anyway it requires the killing to be unlawful. Well that's were the argument against the IDF soldiers falls down. If they are following orders then it's not unlawful. So like I said before the IDF are not terrorists even if you don't agree with how they are being ordered to fight. It has nothing to do with numbers. If it was would the pilot of the Enola Gay, and it's bombardier, be war criminals and terrorists? Hamas's actions are murder, fitting the legal definition and satisfying all elements. Hamas terrorists, IDF soldiers and though both kill at times, only the actions of Hamas are that of terrorists. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. " I find it appauling that the news isn't covering the two mass graves discovered in Gaza, but find time to cover the incident where the police were doing their job. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When have I insulted you? In one of the other many thread on this topic. I forget which one. They are following the orders other army. In most democracies these armies are apolitical. Meaning that subsequent governments can rely on the support of their armed forces and not be subjected to a military coup should the military feel its objectives are not being met. So as for political aims, the military shouldn't get involved. Look at Labour and the Iraq War. We fought the war because the government of the day, Labour, were told about Weapons of Mass Destruction. They were wrong but the war happened anyway. Whatever political aims the Labour Party had proved disastrous and led to them losing power. It's a very risky statergy to go to war on these grounds. The soldiers weren't kick out because they just followed their orders and when the new government came in they followed theirs. To describe individual soldiers as terrorist because you don't agree with tactics, targets or level of response is disingenuous. You may be saying that Hamas are a terrorist group but you are morethan implying that the IDF are too and that's just not right. We're the British squaddies terrorist when they killed Iraqis after finding out their reason for being their was based upon lies? I don't think you would believe that and that's why I believe calling IDF soldiers terrorists or their actions as terrorism is wrong. Please have a ceasefire, please stop the deaths of all innocents but please stop calling ordinary IDF soldiers terrorist and their actions terrorism. Hamas are the terrorists not the IDF. Mrs x I'll be honest, I don't really care which word is used to describe the mass killings of Palestinian civilians by the IDF. They seem to fit the dictionary definition of "terrorism". But if people are upset by that we can use a different word? The point that's being highlighted is that Hamas (rightly) get criticised for what they did. Yet the IDF (who have killed way more civilians) get a free pass because it's possible to argue that the word "terrorism" isn't appropriate to describe them.But that's not the case Hamas are murdering innocent civilians. The actual legal definition involves the unlawful killing, of a reasoning being, with malice forethought. Think it was define by LCJ Coke in the 1700s. Anyway it requires the killing to be unlawful. Well that's were the argument against the IDF soldiers falls down. If they are following orders then it's not unlawful. So like I said before the IDF are not terrorists even if you don't agree with how they are being ordered to fight. It has nothing to do with numbers. If it was would the pilot of the Enola Gay, and it's bombardier, be war criminals and terrorists? Hamas's actions are murder, fitting the legal definition and satisfying all elements. Hamas terrorists, IDF soldiers and though both kill at times, only the actions of Hamas are that of terrorists. Mrs x" What your saying is not right! If a soldier is ordered to do something illegal, then that individual or group are not obliged to carry out that order! If they do then they are just as guilty! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t You're right, you don't. Everyone knows Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
Mrs x
US plans to sanction IDF terrorists battalion Netzah Yahuda and considering other battalions for terrorist activities in Gaza and West Bank. IDF is no different to ISIS Fundamentally different. They are soldiers ISIS are terrorists. IDF don't throw gayguys off building to their deaths.
Mrs x
IDF may not throw gay guys off the buildings but they steal organs from dead Palestinian. Destroy every single school, university and hospital in Gaza. Drop 2000 pounds bomb on civilians, starve the population and drive 2 million of them away from their land and destroy their homes in the name of evil religious ideology. Definitely a terrorists army." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. I find it appauling that the news isn't covering the two mass graves discovered in Gaza, but find time to cover the incident where the police were doing their job. " Funny how you know of these mass graves but the international news agencies don't. Even more surprising that everyone owns a smart phone, lots with 4k cameras. No facts again. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. " And at an earlier march, this same person drove a van into the eyeline of Palestine marchers the police again had to intervene. At the march you mention and went viral his camera man and security are not in the footage, but can be seen later as the police e5cort him on a safe route for him and the protesters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When have I insulted you? In one of the other many thread on this topic. I forget which one. They are following the orders other army. In most democracies these armies are apolitical. Meaning that subsequent governments can rely on the support of their armed forces and not be subjected to a military coup should the military feel its objectives are not being met. So as for political aims, the military shouldn't get involved. Look at Labour and the Iraq War. We fought the war because the government of the day, Labour, were told about Weapons of Mass Destruction. They were wrong but the war happened anyway. Whatever political aims the Labour Party had proved disastrous and led to them losing power. It's a very risky statergy to go to war on these grounds. The soldiers weren't kick out because they just followed their orders and when the new government came in they followed theirs. To describe individual soldiers as terrorist because you don't agree with tactics, targets or level of response is disingenuous. You may be saying that Hamas are a terrorist group but you are morethan implying that the IDF are too and that's just not right. We're the British squaddies terrorist when they killed Iraqis after finding out their reason for being their was based upon lies? I don't think you would believe that and that's why I believe calling IDF soldiers terrorists or their actions as terrorism is wrong. Please have a ceasefire, please stop the deaths of all innocents but please stop calling ordinary IDF soldiers terrorist and their actions terrorism. Hamas are the terrorists not the IDF. Mrs x I'll be honest, I don't really care which word is used to describe the mass killings of Palestinian civilians by the IDF. They seem to fit the dictionary definition of "terrorism". But if people are upset by that we can use a different word? The point that's being highlighted is that Hamas (rightly) get criticised for what they did. Yet the IDF (who have killed way more civilians) get a free pass because it's possible to argue that the word "terrorism" isn't appropriate to describe them.But that's not the case Hamas are murdering innocent civilians. The actual legal definition involves the unlawful killing, of a reasoning being, with malice forethought. Think it was define by LCJ Coke in the 1700s. Anyway it requires the killing to be unlawful. Well that's were the argument against the IDF soldiers falls down. If they are following orders then it's not unlawful. So like I said before the IDF are not terrorists even if you don't agree with how they are being ordered to fight. It has nothing to do with numbers. If it was would the pilot of the Enola Gay, and it's bombardier, be war criminals and terrorists? Hamas's actions are murder, fitting the legal definition and satisfying all elements. Hamas terrorists, IDF soldiers and though both kill at times, only the actions of Hamas are that of terrorists. Mrs x What your saying is not right! If a soldier is ordered to do something illegal, then that individual or group are not obliged to carry out that order! If they do then they are just as guilty!" So what law have they broken then? Funny since Israel hasn't been charged by the ICJ, but as an insider you know better.. I bet your answer will say 'International Law' haha Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t You're right, you don't. Everyone knows Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
Mrs x
US plans to sanction IDF terrorists battalion Netzah Yahuda and considering other battalions for terrorist activities in Gaza and West Bank. IDF is no different to ISIS Fundamentally different. They are soldiers ISIS are terrorists. IDF don't throw gayguys off building to their deaths.
Mrs x
IDF may not throw gay guys off the buildings but they steal organs from dead Palestinian. Destroy every single school, university and hospital in Gaza. Drop 2000 pounds bomb on civilians, starve the population and drive 2 million of them away from their land and destroy their homes in the name of evil religious ideology. Definitely a terrorists army."You cannot condemn your brothers, it's a joke. Just as a side issue, which other army feeds its combatants whilst a war is going on. Also you have no comments about Muslims, killing more than 20 times the amount of innocents, including children and babies than those killed by the IDF since the creation of Israel. Funny that you say nothing. Oh yeah it's because Jews were not involved in the killings. All your arguments have a very racial slant. An anti Jewish one. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide." That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" All your arguments have a very racial slant. An anti Jewish one." There's a lot of thinly veiled antisemitism in here, all based on lies and very little to do with criticism of the Israeli government. It'll be blood libel soon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves." That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves." I agree with you about innocent children being used by Hamas but even then this guys facts are totally wrong. IDF have killed less combatant and civilians since 1948 than Syria did during their recent civil war, were over 700,000, civilians and combatants were killed. Over 20 times the number IDF have killed in this conflict. Don't get me wrong, I wish nobody had to die because of this but if you are going to state a 'fact' at least make sure its factually correct. He talks about 2 million Palestinians forced out of their homes. He fails to mention that 21% of Israeli citizens are Palestinian. At today's figures for the population of Israel, standing at over 9 million, means that 1.8 million citizens of Israel are Palestinian. Strange considering Israel wants to 'wipe' all Palestinians from the Earth. As an additional fact, regarding Israels attempt at the genocide of the Palestinian race, the population of Gaza has risen from just under 1 million in 1960 to over 5 million today. So Israel are either white at genocide or don't really want to eradicate Palestinians as a race. Don't let the truth ruin a good story though. It just doesn't suit the narrative of certain antisemitism on here, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When have I insulted you? In one of the other many thread on this topic. I forget which one. They are following the orders other army. In most democracies these armies are apolitical. Meaning that subsequent governments can rely on the support of their armed forces and not be subjected to a military coup should the military feel its objectives are not being met. So as for political aims, the military shouldn't get involved. Look at Labour and the Iraq War. We fought the war because the government of the day, Labour, were told about Weapons of Mass Destruction. They were wrong but the war happened anyway. Whatever political aims the Labour Party had proved disastrous and led to them losing power. It's a very risky statergy to go to war on these grounds. The soldiers weren't kick out because they just followed their orders and when the new government came in they followed theirs. To describe individual soldiers as terrorist because you don't agree with tactics, targets or level of response is disingenuous. You may be saying that Hamas are a terrorist group but you are morethan implying that the IDF are too and that's just not right. We're the British squaddies terrorist when they killed Iraqis after finding out their reason for being their was based upon lies? I don't think you would believe that and that's why I believe calling IDF soldiers terrorists or their actions as terrorism is wrong. Please have a ceasefire, please stop the deaths of all innocents but please stop calling ordinary IDF soldiers terrorist and their actions terrorism. Hamas are the terrorists not the IDF. Mrs x I'll be honest, I don't really care which word is used to describe the mass killings of Palestinian civilians by the IDF. They seem to fit the dictionary definition of "terrorism". But if people are upset by that we can use a different word? The point that's being highlighted is that Hamas (rightly) get criticised for what they did. Yet the IDF (who have killed way more civilians) get a free pass because it's possible to argue that the word "terrorism" isn't appropriate to describe them.But that's not the case Hamas are murdering innocent civilians. The actual legal definition involves the unlawful killing, of a reasoning being, with malice forethought. Think it was define by LCJ Coke in the 1700s. Anyway it requires the killing to be unlawful. Well that's were the argument against the IDF soldiers falls down. If they are following orders then it's not unlawful. So like I said before the IDF are not terrorists even if you don't agree with how they are being ordered to fight. It has nothing to do with numbers. If it was would the pilot of the Enola Gay, and it's bombardier, be war criminals and terrorists? Hamas's actions are murder, fitting the legal definition and satisfying all elements. Hamas terrorists, IDF soldiers and though both kill at times, only the actions of Hamas are that of terrorists. Mrs x What your saying is not right! If a soldier is ordered to do something illegal, then that individual or group are not obliged to carry out that order! If they do then they are just as guilty!So what law have they broken then? Funny since Israel hasn't been charged by the ICJ, but as an insider you know better.. I bet your answer will say 'International Law' haha Mrs x" That's the Geneva convention. I like others were actually trained for it, and put it to practical use. Unlike yourself who interpreted everything to suit their narrative. Why do you ignore facts when they don't suit your narrative? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. I find it appauling that the news isn't covering the two mass graves discovered in Gaza, but find time to cover the incident where the police were doing their job. Funny how you know of these mass graves but the international news agencies don't. Even more surprising that everyone owns a smart phone, lots with 4k cameras. No facts again. Mrs x" https://youtu.be/7AXEOCKP_HU?feature=shared | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. " The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault." They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault." If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already." That escalated to bullshit accusations very fast. Are you really suggesting that by not having a boner for the mass killing of Palestinian civilians, women and children, that makes you want to accuse someone of hating Jews? A new low for this forum, which is pretty much in the gutter anyway. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x" That's a lot of words to defend the mass killings of kids. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. " Thats is the guy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy" The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When have I insulted you? In one of the other many thread on this topic. I forget which one. They are following the orders other army. In most democracies these armies are apolitical. Meaning that subsequent governments can rely on the support of their armed forces and not be subjected to a military coup should the military feel its objectives are not being met. So as for political aims, the military shouldn't get involved. Look at Labour and the Iraq War. We fought the war because the government of the day, Labour, were told about Weapons of Mass Destruction. They were wrong but the war happened anyway. Whatever political aims the Labour Party had proved disastrous and led to them losing power. It's a very risky statergy to go to war on these grounds. The soldiers weren't kick out because they just followed their orders and when the new government came in they followed theirs. To describe individual soldiers as terrorist because you don't agree with tactics, targets or level of response is disingenuous. You may be saying that Hamas are a terrorist group but you are morethan implying that the IDF are too and that's just not right. We're the British squaddies terrorist when they killed Iraqis after finding out their reason for being their was based upon lies? I don't think you would believe that and that's why I believe calling IDF soldiers terrorists or their actions as terrorism is wrong. Please have a ceasefire, please stop the deaths of all innocents but please stop calling ordinary IDF soldiers terrorist and their actions terrorism. Hamas are the terrorists not the IDF. Mrs x I'll be honest, I don't really care which word is used to describe the mass killings of Palestinian civilians by the IDF. They seem to fit the dictionary definition of "terrorism". But if people are upset by that we can use a different word? The point that's being highlighted is that Hamas (rightly) get criticised for what they did. Yet the IDF (who have killed way more civilians) get a free pass because it's possible to argue that the word "terrorism" isn't appropriate to describe them.But that's not the case Hamas are murdering innocent civilians. The actual legal definition involves the unlawful killing, of a reasoning being, with malice forethought. Think it was define by LCJ Coke in the 1700s. Anyway it requires the killing to be unlawful. Well that's were the argument against the IDF soldiers falls down. If they are following orders then it's not unlawful. So like I said before the IDF are not terrorists even if you don't agree with how they are being ordered to fight. It has nothing to do with numbers. If it was would the pilot of the Enola Gay, and it's bombardier, be war criminals and terrorists? Hamas's actions are murder, fitting the legal definition and satisfying all elements. Hamas terrorists, IDF soldiers and though both kill at times, only the actions of Hamas are that of terrorists. Mrs x What your saying is not right! If a soldier is ordered to do something illegal, then that individual or group are not obliged to carry out that order! If they do then they are just as guilty!So what law have they broken then? Funny since Israel hasn't been charged by the ICJ, but as an insider you know better.. I bet your answer will say 'International Law' haha Mrs x That's the Geneva convention. I like others were actually trained for it, and put it to practical use. Unlike yourself who interpreted everything to suit their narrative. Why do you ignore facts when they don't suit your narrative? " Well if you know about the Geneva Convention, any alleged offences under it have to go through due process. So please tell me when this has happened considering the ICJ, the adjudicating body here has not sat on any case during this conflict. So given that that's the situation, it is just pure speculation at present as to whether anything has been in breach of the convention. So tell me the name of any case that's been brought before the ICJ involving this and concerning this conflict. I expect a quick response because like you say you recieved training on this. Was this training as extensive as a lawyer who took a European elective module as part of their law degree or was it a couple of days course given to all squaddies, you know the squaddies who are renowned for their legal expertise. Sorry squaddies I love you and the service you provide to a very grateful nation. I'm aware you are not a virtue signalling bunch but something has to be said here. Anyway did you consider your actions in Iraq, during that conflict that was started, perpetrated and killed lots of innocent Iraqis on a Web of lies as a breach of the Geneva Convention. You never answered before, did you consider your part in this invalid war as terrorism. Oh no, you don't because you are not a Jew. As for ignoring facts, I think you'll find it's not me. Not one case has been brought yet. Not saying it won't be at this exact moment in time their isn't any. That enough FACTS for you, Back to Twitter, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x That's a lot of words to defend the mass killings of kids. " Even fewer not to condemn burning babies alive. What's the air like up there on the moral high ground, thin I expect, a bit like your arguments, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble" Bit ironic that a march for peace wanted to get violent to an individual for openly looking like he had certain religious beliefs. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble" The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. That escalated to bullshit accusations very fast. Are you really suggesting that by not having a boner for the mass killing of Palestinian civilians, women and children, that makes you want to accuse someone of hating Jews? A new low for this forum, which is pretty much in the gutter anyway. " It's because there are so many posts just blaming one side in the conflict, there's two sides here who should just stop the violence. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public." Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x That's a lot of words to defend the mass killings of kids. Even fewer not to condemn burning babies alive. " That never happened. However you will have noticed I've condemned Hamas's actions. And I can confirm I am opposed to the killings and mass killings of civilians regardless of their ethnicity, religion or nationality. Seems other people aren't able to do that . " What's the air like up there on the moral high ground, " Just to be clear, you're accusing me of taking the moral high ground because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians? In which case, I'll take that. Thanks. " thin I expect, a bit like your arguments, Mrs x" And back to ridiculous personal insults. I'll leave you to your nonsense. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x That's a lot of words to defend the mass killings of kids. Even fewer not to condemn burning babies alive. That never happened. However you will have noticed I've condemned Hamas's actions. And I can confirm I am opposed to the killings and mass killings of civilians regardless of their ethnicity, religion or nationality. Seems other people aren't able to do that . What's the air like up there on the moral high ground, Just to be clear, you're accusing me of taking the moral high ground because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians? In which case, I'll take that. Thanks. thin I expect, a bit like your arguments, Mrs x And back to ridiculous personal insults. I'll leave you to your nonsense." The burnings absolutely happened, a verified fact. Chose to believe whatever but it's true and sources have been given. As for my insults, you started it tonight to say I didn't condemn the killing of Palestine children. Well go and look at my previous posts and you'll see I condemn all innocent deaths but that doesn't suit your narrative Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x That's a lot of words to defend the mass killings of kids. Even fewer not to condemn burning babies alive. That never happened. However you will have noticed I've condemned Hamas's actions. And I can confirm I am opposed to the killings and mass killings of civilians regardless of their ethnicity, religion or nationality. Seems other people aren't able to do that . What's the air like up there on the moral high ground, Just to be clear, you're accusing me of taking the moral high ground because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians? In which case, I'll take that. Thanks. thin I expect, a bit like your arguments, Mrs x And back to ridiculous personal insults. I'll leave you to your nonsense.The burnings absolutely happened, a verified fact. Chose to believe whatever but it's true and sources have been given. As for my insults, you started it tonight to say I didn't condemn the killing of Palestine children. Well go and look at my previous posts and you'll see I condemn all innocent deaths but that doesn't suit your narrative Mrs x" Then what are we arguing about? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite troubleBit ironic that a march for peace wanted to get violent to an individual for openly looking like he had certain religious beliefs. Mrs x" A journalist out to incite trouble,was asked to go a diffrent way but wanted to incite the crowd as i said the police should have jailed him | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x" Yes twice last Friday but more footage has come out showing him at other events "being openly jewish", a phrase which puzzled me but now realise he was known to the police at other rallies. So I see the phrase they used, as a bad example of an African guy walking with the 3K's whilst they burned a cross that guy is going to get it, it would stir violence unrest at least, so I understand why they moved him on now, after all the police are there to protect the peace. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already." Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. Just do one !!!" Are you a terrorist sympathiser  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There will always be tragedies in war. When the stated aim of Hamas is to wipe Israel off the face of the planet and they illustrate that aim with acts of terror, culminating in Oct 7th, what do you think Israel should have done? What’s interesting is when everyone talks about the so-called ‘open air prison’ of Gaza, they fail to mention the huge walls built by Egypt on their border with Gaza. I wonder why fellow Muslims would feel the need to do this?" Oh well. According to your logic 7th October is a tragedy of war? When stated aim of Saranyahu regime is to wipe off Arab population from occupied Palestinian territory. I disagree with Gaza was open air prison. It was concentration camp just like in Nazi Germany. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x" The tunnels under the hospitals were built by the Israelis before they left Gaza. It was intended to be used as extra storage capacity | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x The tunnels under the hospitals were built by the Israelis before they left Gaza. It was intended to be used as extra storage capacity " The tunnels are longer than those of the London Underground, so storage that. It was built be Hamas, not Israel Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves." Ah ok. Can you explain what 10 year old lady was doing at Navatim Airbase when Iran bombed it? IDF must be using her as human shield! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x" He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it "I'm not a victim, I'm neither Palestinian or Israeli. I'm not a Jew or a Muslim. I condemn violence on both sides but one is definitely terrorism the other is not. You cannot condemn Muslim terrorism because you cannot criticise your brothers. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x The tunnels under the hospitals were built by the Israelis before they left Gaza. It was intended to be used as extra storage capacity The tunnels are longer than those of the London Underground, so storage that. It was built be Hamas, not Israel Mrs x" Then why did an Israeli government official say that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time!" So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x The tunnels under the hospitals were built by the Israelis before they left Gaza. It was intended to be used as extra storage capacity The tunnels are longer than those of the London Underground, so storage that. It was built be Hamas, not Israel Mrs x" https://youtu.be/07vX79CuYl8?si=_zwGAcDrJx7MgIeV | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. Ah ok. Can you explain what 10 year old lady was doing at Navatim Airbase when Iran bombed it? IDF must be using her as human shield!" Maybe her Dad was stationed there? Oh yeah sorry for that. I promise never to post such a simple explanation, obviously I will post an extreme Zionist conspiracy about the extermination of all Palestinians from Gaza and the subsequent domination of the World. Suppose that will fit your narrative better. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs x" NO!.. YOU GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD! if A black guy was suicidal enough to provoke hundreds of KKK then he needs protecting. You get more outlandish and stupid !! You are eithe incredibly stupid with w low IQ or trolling, with stupid Ill informed nonsense! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gaza doctors save baby from womb of mother killed in IDF terrorists strike. You might need to add some more to this if you want to stimulate a discussion. No I don’t You're right, you don't. Everyone knows Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
Mrs x
US plans to sanction IDF terrorists battalion Netzah Yahuda and considering other battalions for terrorist activities in Gaza and West Bank. IDF is no different to ISIS Fundamentally different. They are soldiers ISIS are terrorists. IDF don't throw gayguys off building to their deaths.
Mrs x
IDF may not throw gay guys off the buildings but they steal organs from dead Palestinian. Destroy every single school, university and hospital in Gaza. Drop 2000 pounds bomb on civilians, starve the population and drive 2 million of them away from their land and destroy their homes in the name of evil religious ideology. Definitely a terrorists army.You cannot condemn your brothers, it's a joke.
Just as a side issue, which other army feeds its combatants whilst a war is going on.
Also you have no comments about Muslims, killing more than 20 times the amount of innocents, including children and babies than those killed by the IDF since the creation of Israel. Funny that you say nothing.
Oh yeah it's because Jews were not involved in the killings.
All your arguments have a very racial slant. An anti Jewish one.
Mrs x"My brothers  what you are on about? I’m not a Muslim and have never been. One need to be a human to see suffering of innocent children killed by these Israeli terrorists.
Exposing IDF for its crimes and genocide in Gaza is antisemitism lol
Feel free to start your own thread on Muslims killings 20 times more in Syria but stop repeating lies on mine | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. Ah ok. Can you explain what 10 year old lady was doing at Navatim Airbase when Iran bombed it? IDF must be using her as human shield!Maybe her Dad was stationed there? Oh yeah sorry for that. I promise never to post such a simple explanation, obviously I will post an extreme Zionist conspiracy about the extermination of all Palestinians from Gaza and the subsequent domination of the World. Suppose that will fit your narrative better. Mrs x" You post endless fucking bullshit. Cherry picked shite, supposition,opinionated interpretations and cobbler together utter fucking shite! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it I'm not a victim, I'm neither Palestinian or Israeli. I'm not a Jew or a Muslim. I condemn violence on both sides but one is definitely terrorism the other is not.
You cannot condemn Muslim terrorism because you cannot criticise your brothers.
Mrs x"And you can not condemn IDF terrorists because you can not criticise your brothers | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. Ah ok. Can you explain what 10 year old lady was doing at Navatim Airbase when Iran bombed it? IDF must be using her as human shield!Maybe her Dad was stationed there? Oh yeah sorry for that. I promise never to post such a simple explanation, obviously I will post an extreme Zionist conspiracy about the extermination of all Palestinians from Gaza and the subsequent domination of the World. Suppose that will fit your narrative better. Mrs x" You were posting utter shite based on opinionated bullcrap about the mass graves just discovered. WOBBLE YOU HEAD before accusing others. Your arse must jealous of your mouth with all the fucking shite flowing from it! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. Ah ok. Can you explain what 10 year old lady was doing at Navatim Airbase when Iran bombed it? IDF must be using her as human shield!Maybe her Dad was stationed there? Oh yeah sorry for that. I promise never to post such a simple explanation, obviously I will post an extreme Zionist conspiracy about the extermination of all Palestinians from Gaza and the subsequent domination of the World. Suppose that will fit your narrative better. Mrs x You post endless fucking bullshit. Cherry picked shite, supposition,opinionated interpretations and cobbler together utter fucking shite!" I agree. These threads are brilliant. Zionists flock on these like headless chickens only to expose their evil religious ideology. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs x" were they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x The tunnels under the hospitals were built by the Israelis before they left Gaza. It was intended to be used as extra storage capacity The tunnels are longer than those of the London Underground, so storage that. It was built be Hamas, not Israel Mrs x https://youtu.be/07vX79CuYl8?si=_zwGAcDrJx7MgIeV " You clearly didn't watch the whole video. It clearly states that Israel built the hospital and as such there were bunkers built underneath it. An ex Israeli Prime Minister readily stated it. No secret. However the video goes on to explain the tunnels were built by Hamas and showed a building , next to the hospital, which had Hamas built tunnels under it. The reporters went on to say that other tunnels were obviously built by Hamas and did not match the design of the Israel structures which they had the plans for, which they then showed and even described as a 'basement' and not as tunnels. Did you fall asleep or just get bored before the end? And this is from the same source that confirmed the baby burning, soido believe it. Hamas built tunnels, Israel built structures under the hospital as they built it but this source showed the plans and called it a 'basement'. That's a common feature under lots of buildings, hundreds of miles of tunnels are not. Mrs x  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. " For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. " I believe the beheading is was disproved, it was a statement made by a far right Zuonist supporter, who was later found to be lying. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. Ah ok. Can you explain what 10 year old lady was doing at Navatim Airbase when Iran bombed it? IDF must be using her as human shield!Maybe her Dad was stationed there? Oh yeah sorry for that. I promise never to post such a simple explanation, obviously I will post an extreme Zionist conspiracy about the extermination of all Palestinians from Gaza and the subsequent domination of the World. Suppose that will fit your narrative better. Mrs x You post endless fucking bullshit. Cherry picked shite, supposition,opinionated interpretations and cobbler together utter fucking shite! I agree. These threads are brilliant. Zionists flock on these like headless chickens only to expose their evil religious ideology. " 700,000 innocent Muslim deaths in this region and you say nothing. Thousands of Muslims starved to death in this region and you say nothing, the murders of over 750 innocent contractors aiding Muslims in this area and you say nothing. Why is that, can you answer that? All those innocent Muslim lives lost, murdered and you say nothing, that I find strange. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" All your arguments have a very racial slant. An anti Jewish one. There's a lot of thinly veiled antisemitism in here, all based on lies and very little to do with criticism of the Israeli government. It'll be blood libel soon." There a lot of Islamophobia in here, all based on lies. Are you not the same guy who was calling for mass killing of Palestinians on different thread | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. Ah ok. Can you explain what 10 year old lady was doing at Navatim Airbase when Iran bombed it? IDF must be using her as human shield!Maybe her Dad was stationed there? Oh yeah sorry for that. I promise never to post such a simple explanation, obviously I will post an extreme Zionist conspiracy about the extermination of all Palestinians from Gaza and the subsequent domination of the World. Suppose that will fit your narrative better. Mrs x You were posting utter shite based on opinionated bullcrap about the mass graves just discovered. WOBBLE YOU HEAD before accusing others. Your arse must jealous of your mouth with all the fucking shite flowing from it!" I didn't realise you were so nasty. I could put up with the utter lack of any facts, the lies, like the last one at the mass graves. I didn't spout opinion, not sure I even commented but I will now. Palestinians claiming mass graves dug by IDF. The IDF claim they exhumed bodies looking for the bodies of those Israelis taken on Oct 7th. No proof on either side to definitely say which story is true. You point to a video that only shows the Palestinian sifr. It even uses the word 'alleged when talking about the accusations from the Palestinian side. You appear to be struggling with what makes for guilt in a criminal sense and the process required to bring about a guilty verdict. You cannot be guilty just because someone says you are. You have to be charged, an investigation, a trial and a verdict need to be given. Innocent until proven guilty is a good maxim. Only verdicts from a court counts, not verdicts from the courts of Twitter or public opinion. I'm sorry if you feel this is just myopinion I swear it's not and I hope most of what I say is factual. I'm sorry if you've upset yourself by what I've said, it was my intention, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" All your arguments have a very racial slant. An anti Jewish one. There's a lot of thinly veiled antisemitism in here, all based on lies and very little to do with criticism of the Israeli government. It'll be blood libel soon. There a lot of Islamophobia in here, all based on lies. Are you not the same guy who was calling for mass killing of Palestinians on different thread "I've never called for the mass killing of anyone and I'm not a guy !!! If I'm Islamapgobic why am I outraged by all the Muslim deaths in the area and you are not? Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" All your arguments have a very racial slant. An anti Jewish one. There's a lot of thinly veiled antisemitism in here, all based on lies and very little to do with criticism of the Israeli government. It'll be blood libel soon. There a lot of Islamophobia in here, all based on lies. Are you not the same guy who was calling for mass killing of Palestinians on different thread I've never called for the mass killing of anyone and I'm not a guy !!! If I'm Islamapgobic why am I outraged by all the Muslim deaths in the area and you are not?
Mrs x"Read my post again. It’s not aimed at you unless you are using two accounts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it I'm not a victim, I'm neither Palestinian or Israeli. I'm not a Jew or a Muslim. I condemn violence on both sides but one is definitely terrorism the other is not.
You cannot condemn Muslim terrorism because you cannot criticise your brothers.
Mrs x
And you can not condemn IDF terrorists because you can not criticise your brothers "They are not my brothers. I was born a Catholic. I'm not Jewish, I'm not even sure I know any Jewish person or have any Jewish friends, it's never come up. Oh now I think of it I'm lying.... Barbara Striesand and Neil Diamond, fantastic singers and Jewish. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" All your arguments have a very racial slant. An anti Jewish one. There's a lot of thinly veiled antisemitism in here, all based on lies and very little to do with criticism of the Israeli government. It'll be blood libel soon. There a lot of Islamophobia in here, all based on lies. Are you not the same guy who was calling for mass killing of Palestinians on different thread I've never called for the mass killing of anyone and I'm not a guy !!! If I'm Islamapgobic why am I outraged by all the Muslim deaths in the area and you are not?
Mrs x
Read my post again. It’s not aimed at you unless you are using two accounts "I apologise for that, see how that works, when you get something wrong you apologise. Why won't you condemn the horrific numbers of Muslim civilian deaths in the area, when you are so vociferous in your defence of similar deaths in Gaza? Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it I'm not a victim, I'm neither Palestinian or Israeli. I'm not a Jew or a Muslim. I condemn violence on both sides but one is definitely terrorism the other is not.
You cannot condemn Muslim terrorism because you cannot criticise your brothers.
Mrs x
And you can not condemn IDF terrorists because you can not criticise your brothers They are not my brothers. I was born a Catholic. I'm not Jewish, I'm not even sure I know any Jewish person or have any Jewish friends, it's never come up.
Oh now I think of it I'm lying.... Barbara Striesand and Neil Diamond, fantastic singers and Jewish.
Mrs x"I have Jewish friends and one of my fwb is Jewish and they are lovely people but that doesn’t mean condemning IDF terrorists for holocaust against Palestinians is antisemitic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" All your arguments have a very racial slant. An anti Jewish one. There's a lot of thinly veiled antisemitism in here, all based on lies and very little to do with criticism of the Israeli government. It'll be blood libel soon. There a lot of Islamophobia in here, all based on lies. Are you not the same guy who was calling for mass killing of Palestinians on different thread I've never called for the mass killing of anyone and I'm not a guy !!! If I'm Islamapgobic why am I outraged by all the Muslim deaths in the area and you are not?
Mrs x
Read my post again. It’s not aimed at you unless you are using two accounts I apologise for that, see how that works, when you get something wrong you apologise.
Why won't you condemn the horrific numbers of Muslim civilian deaths in the area, when you are so vociferous in your defence of similar deaths in Gaza?
Mrs x"You keep asking me to condemn Syrian Army for killing its citizens in Syria. What don’t you start new thread on that topic. We are discussing here IDF terrorists activities in occupied Palestinian territory. You got it completely wrong | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it I'm not a victim, I'm neither Palestinian or Israeli. I'm not a Jew or a Muslim. I condemn violence on both sides but one is definitely terrorism the other is not.
You cannot condemn Muslim terrorism because you cannot criticise your brothers.
Mrs x
And you can not condemn IDF terrorists because you can not criticise your brothers They are not my brothers. I was born a Catholic. I'm not Jewish, I'm not even sure I know any Jewish person or have any Jewish friends, it's never come up.
Oh now I think of it I'm lying.... Barbara Striesand and Neil Diamond, fantastic singers and Jewish.
Mrs x
I have Jewish friends and one of my fwb is Jewish and they are lovely people but that doesn’t mean condemning IDF terrorists for holocaust against Palestinians is antisemitic. "IDF are soldiers, not terrorists. It's not a holocaust, to even use that word is offensive. To compare the systematic killing of over 6 million individuals to the tragic loss of innocent civilian lives in this conflict is wrong, very wrong. IDF soldiers are carrying out orders, not committing murder. Why aren't you condemning the slaughter of other Muslims in the area. I find that very strange. Given that the numbers are vastly greater and you say nothing. What about the Muslim deaths when India split and Pakistan was formed was that terrorism? Coming from India I'd have thought you'd have an opinion on this matter. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it I'm not a victim, I'm neither Palestinian or Israeli. I'm not a Jew or a Muslim. I condemn violence on both sides but one is definitely terrorism the other is not.
You cannot condemn Muslim terrorism because you cannot criticise your brothers.
Mrs x
And you can not condemn IDF terrorists because you can not criticise your brothers They are not my brothers. I was born a Catholic. I'm not Jewish, I'm not even sure I know any Jewish person or have any Jewish friends, it's never come up.
Oh now I think of it I'm lying.... Barbara Striesand and Neil Diamond, fantastic singers and Jewish.
Mrs x
I have Jewish friends and one of my fwb is Jewish and they are lovely people but that doesn’t mean condemning IDF terrorists for holocaust against Palestinians is antisemitic. IDF are soldiers, not terrorists. It's not a holocaust, to even use that word is offensive. To compare the systematic killing of over 6 million individuals to the tragic loss of innocent civilian lives in this conflict is wrong, very wrong.
IDF soldiers are carrying out orders, not committing murder.
Why aren't you condemning the slaughter of other Muslims in the area. I find that very strange. Given that the numbers are vastly greater and you say nothing.
What about the Muslim deaths when India split and Pakistan was formed was that terrorism? Coming from India I'd have thought you'd have an opinion on this matter.
Mrs x"I think it’s offensive not to compare it to holocaust for systemic killing of Palestinians over the last 70 years when they have been starved and killed in great numbers just like Hitler did it to Jews in Second World War. What makes you think I came from India
You do realise that you can be British Indian and born in this country and have no connection to India. See you got it wrong again. Your view of world is very narrow minded, just because I criticise IDF and Satanyahu regime you think I’m antisemitic. Wait till you find out my Jewish friends views about Israel, IDF and Satanyahu regime | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it I'm not a victim, I'm neither Palestinian or Israeli. I'm not a Jew or a Muslim. I condemn violence on both sides but one is definitely terrorism the other is not.
You cannot condemn Muslim terrorism because you cannot criticise your brothers.
Mrs x
And you can not condemn IDF terrorists because you can not criticise your brothers They are not my brothers. I was born a Catholic. I'm not Jewish, I'm not even sure I know any Jewish person or have any Jewish friends, it's never come up.
Oh now I think of it I'm lying.... Barbara Striesand and Neil Diamond, fantastic singers and Jewish.
Mrs x
I have Jewish friends and one of my fwb is Jewish and they are lovely people but that doesn’t mean condemning IDF terrorists for holocaust against Palestinians is antisemitic. IDF are soldiers, not terrorists. It's not a holocaust, to even use that word is offensive. To compare the systematic killing of over 6 million individuals to the tragic loss of innocent civilian lives in this conflict is wrong, very wrong.
IDF soldiers are carrying out orders, not committing murder.
Why aren't you condemning the slaughter of other Muslims in the area. I find that very strange. Given that the numbers are vastly greater and you say nothing.
What about the Muslim deaths when India split and Pakistan was formed was that terrorism? Coming from India I'd have thought you'd have an opinion on this matter.
Mrs x
I think it’s offensive not to compare it to holocaust for systemic killing of Palestinians over the last 70 years when they have been starved and killed in great numbers just like Hitler did it to Jews in Second World War.
What makes you think I came from India
You do realise that you can be British Indian and born in this country and have no connection to India. See you got it wrong again. Your view of world is very narrow minded, just because I criticise IDF and Satanyahu regime you think I’m antisemitic. Wait till you find out my Jewish friends views about Israel, IDF and Satanyahu regime "if you have no connection why mention it. Its a bit silly saying you are one thing and then saying you arent but its not surprising. You're claims that Palestine and the Holocaust share a similar history, is not only ridiculous it is offensive and by minimising the outcome of the worst, single genocidal act in history you are arguing from an antisemitic viewpoint. Hamas started this conflict on Oct 7th by committing the mass murderous over 1000 innocent civilians. If they'd kept up this rate of terrorism they would have killed getting on for almost a quarter of a million innocent civilians. Hamas are a recognised terrorist organisation, the IDF are not. Nothing you say will make any difference. It's funny how the son of the leader of Hamas, the Green Prince, describes Hamas as evil and will never negotiate with Israel and will only stop once every Jrw in Israel is killed. That's from the son of the leader of Hamas, this was the guy being groomed to take over and he saw how evil Hamas were. The leaders son, now that makes you think. Obviously I'm not being literal here, well about the thinking that is. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. I find it appauling that the news isn't covering the two mass graves discovered in Gaza, but find time to cover the incident where the police were doing their job. Funny how you know of these mass graves but the international news agencies don't. Even more surprising that everyone owns a smart phone, lots with 4k cameras. No facts again. Mrs x" You are making fool of yourself. The UN's human rights chief has said he is "horrified" by the destruction of Gaza's Nasser and al-Shifa hospitals and the reports of "mass graves" being found at the sites after Israeli raids. BBC, Sky News, UN News, Financial Times, Independent, Guardian to name few. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Hamas are a recognised terrorist organisation, the IDF are not. Nothing you say will make any difference. It's funny how the son of the leader of Hamas, the Green Prince, describes Hamas as evil and will never negotiate with Israel and will only stop once every Jrw in Israel is killed. That's from the son of the leader of Hamas, this was the guy being groomed to take over and he saw how evil Hamas were." What's hilarious is how Netenyahu funded the terrorist organisation: https://m.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/netanyahu-money-to-hamas-part-of-strategy-to-keep-palestinians-divided-583082 None of these Israeli flag waving idiots ever seems to mention that. Instead they call Hamas terrorists as if we didn't know and as if the protests were about Hamas. Well, dudes, YOU PUT THEM THERE... Any other country funding terrorists would be on a sanction list and it's leaders imprisoned, strange how Israel and it's government wasn't! Hilarious how, in 2023 before October 7 - 243 Palestinians were killed in the West Bank alone (an area not governed by Hamas.). They were killed by Israelis... https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/latest/palestinians-west-bank-2023-was-deadliest-year-record https://pchrgaza.org/en/israeli-human-rights-violations-in-the-occupied-palestinian-territory-weekly-update-27-september-04-october-2023/ Leading up to October 7, around 650 Palestinians were killed in Gaza, by Israelis. This is exactly why Israel says "the single largest number of deaths" when referring to October 7. They can't stomach the fact that they've been killing Palestinians since time has gone at a steady but consistent rate. If it were a death by numbers game, Israel won a LONG time ago. 12,855 settlements were approved for construction in the West Bank alone before October 7 in 2023. I didn't look up the numbers in Gaza. 2873 Palestinians held without trial in "administrative detention" in 2023 before October 7, MANY who are minors. Effectively hostages. We've witnessed Israel blatantly lying about not striking al-Ahli Hospital, AND THEN subsequently destroying EVERY hospital in Gaza systematically claiming Hamas were there and tunnels were underneath. They systematically bombed churches, mosques, schools, universities. They put people in mass graves. Anyone supporting Israel at this stage is a psychopath. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. I find it appauling that the news isn't covering the two mass graves discovered in Gaza, but find time to cover the incident where the police were doing their job. Funny how you know of these mass graves but the international news agencies don't. Even more surprising that everyone owns a smart phone, lots with 4k cameras. No facts again. Mrs x You are making fool of yourself. The UN's human rights chief has said he is "horrified" by the destruction of Gaza's Nasser and al-Shifa hospitals and the reports of "mass graves" being found at the sites after Israeli raids. BBC, Sky News, UN News, Financial Times, Independent, Guardian to name few. " In the article you are quoting you are correct the UN rights chief Volker Türk was 'horrified' at the reports of mass graves from Palestian sources, Gaza's Hamas-run Civil Emergency Service. However you have not mention that the same report stated that The Israeli military said claims by Palestinian authorities that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had buried bodies were "baseless and unfounded". It said forces searching for Israeli hostages had examined bodies previously buried by Palestinians near Nasser Hospital and had returned the bodies to where they were buried after they were examined. "The examination was conducted in a careful manner and exclusively in places where intelligence indicated the possible presence of hostages," it said in a statement. "The examination was carried out respectfully while maintaining the dignity of the deceased." So the reality of the situation is that both sides are claiming different reasons for the graves and their involvement in it. You imply that the UN have found against Israel but that is untrue. They are horrified by the numbers of bodies alleged to have been found and are working to corroborate the claims brought by the Palestinians. That means they don't have proof about any potential crimes here or in fact what part was played by either side. So if you want to use news articles you should give a whole summary of what was said and by whom. One side will say one thing, the other will rebate that's obvious. However to try and establish fact, with a purely one sided view, which hasn't yet been corroborated is foolish. As for the quotes from others that Israel put Hamas in power is quite strange given Hamas's claim to have won a fair election, taking votes from the previous terrorist regime Fatah, who know govern the West Bank. As for psychopathic behaviours and beliefs, wouldn't indiscriminate murder, killing of woman and children and the burning of babies indicative of a psychopathic mindset. Just saying. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. I find it appauling that the news isn't covering the two mass graves discovered in Gaza, but find time to cover the incident where the police were doing their job. Funny how you know of these mass graves but the international news agencies don't. Even more surprising that everyone owns a smart phone, lots with 4k cameras. No facts again. Mrs x You are making fool of yourself. The UN's human rights chief has said he is "horrified" by the destruction of Gaza's Nasser and al-Shifa hospitals and the reports of "mass graves" being found at the sites after Israeli raids. BBC, Sky News, UN News, Financial Times, Independent, Guardian to name few. In the article you are quoting you are correct the UN rights chief Volker Türk was 'horrified' at the reports of mass graves from Palestian sources, Gaza's Hamas-run Civil Emergency Service. However you have not mention that the same report stated that The Israeli military said claims by Palestinian authorities that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had buried bodies were "baseless and unfounded". It said forces searching for Israeli hostages had examined bodies previously buried by Palestinians near Nasser Hospital and had returned the bodies to where they were buried after they were examined. "The examination was conducted in a careful manner and exclusively in places where intelligence indicated the possible presence of hostages," it said in a statement. "The examination was carried out respectfully while maintaining the dignity of the deceased." So the reality of the situation is that both sides are claiming different reasons for the graves and their involvement in it. You imply that the UN have found against Israel but that is untrue. They are horrified by the numbers of bodies alleged to have been found and are working to corroborate the claims brought by the Palestinians. That means they don't have proof about any potential crimes here or in fact what part was played by either side. So if you want to use news articles you should give a whole summary of what was said and by whom. One side will say one thing, the other will rebate that's obvious. However to try and establish fact, with a purely one sided view, which hasn't yet been corroborated is foolish. As for the quotes from others that Israel put Hamas in power is quite strange given Hamas's claim to have won a fair election, taking votes from the previous terrorist regime Fatah, who know govern the West Bank. As for psychopathic behaviours and beliefs, wouldn't indiscriminate murder, killing of woman and children and the burning of babies indicative of a psychopathic mindset. Just saying. Mrs x" indiscminate killing women and children you do realise you have just described the idf aswell as hamas, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. I find it appauling that the news isn't covering the two mass graves discovered in Gaza, but find time to cover the incident where the police were doing their job. Funny how you know of these mass graves but the international news agencies don't. Even more surprising that everyone owns a smart phone, lots with 4k cameras. No facts again. Mrs x You are making fool of yourself. The UN's human rights chief has said he is "horrified" by the destruction of Gaza's Nasser and al-Shifa hospitals and the reports of "mass graves" being found at the sites after Israeli raids. BBC, Sky News, UN News, Financial Times, Independent, Guardian to name few. In the article you are quoting you are correct the UN rights chief Volker Türk was 'horrified' at the reports of mass graves from Palestian sources, Gaza's Hamas-run Civil Emergency Service. However you have not mention that the same report stated that The Israeli military said claims by Palestinian authorities that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had buried bodies were "baseless and unfounded". It said forces searching for Israeli hostages had examined bodies previously buried by Palestinians near Nasser Hospital and had returned the bodies to where they were buried after they were examined. "The examination was conducted in a careful manner and exclusively in places where intelligence indicated the possible presence of hostages," it said in a statement. "The examination was carried out respectfully while maintaining the dignity of the deceased." So the reality of the situation is that both sides are claiming different reasons for the graves and their involvement in it. You imply that the UN have found against Israel but that is untrue. They are horrified by the numbers of bodies alleged to have been found and are working to corroborate the claims brought by the Palestinians. That means they don't have proof about any potential crimes here or in fact what part was played by either side. So if you want to use news articles you should give a whole summary of what was said and by whom. One side will say one thing, the other will rebate that's obvious. However to try and establish fact, with a purely one sided view, which hasn't yet been corroborated is foolish. As for the quotes from others that Israel put Hamas in power is quite strange given Hamas's claim to have won a fair election, taking votes from the previous terrorist regime Fatah, who know govern the West Bank. As for psychopathic behaviours and beliefs, wouldn't indiscriminate murder, killing of woman and children and the burning of babies indicative of a psychopathic mindset. Just saying. Mrs xindiscminate killing women and children you do realise you have just described the idf aswell as hamas," I haven't, Hamas hide behind children, it's a terrible tragedy but that's why they built the tunnels were they did. So that children would be weaponised, used as human shields to create international condemnation of Israel. Hamas burnt babies alive that's a fact. The deliberate targeting of babies. It's not similar at all. It is however a tragedy, no innocent life should be lost but Hamas are hiding behind their innocents, Israel are fighting to protect theirs. More rockets fired into Israel last night but these must be the non lethal kind, filled with fairy dust and good wishes because nobody is mentioning this. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x" You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. They have no choice but to defend themselves when attacked. Just admit you hate Jews already. Hahaha. Playing a permanent victim card again. It’s been played so many times that you have cheapen it I'm not a victim, I'm neither Palestinian or Israeli. I'm not a Jew or a Muslim. I condemn violence on both sides but one is definitely terrorism the other is not.
You cannot condemn Muslim terrorism because you cannot criticise your brothers.
Mrs x"Apologies if this was addressed already. I don't think that was aimed at you. It was aimed at the chap who accused me of hating Jews based on the evidence that I oppose the mass slaughter of women and children regardless of their ethnicity. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x The tunnels under the hospitals were built by the Israelis before they left Gaza. It was intended to be used as extra storage capacity The tunnels are longer than those of the London Underground, so storage that. It was built be Hamas, not Israel Mrs x https://youtu.be/07vX79CuYl8?si=_zwGAcDrJx7MgIeV You clearly didn't watch the whole video. It clearly states that Israel built the hospital and as such there were bunkers built underneath it. An ex Israeli Prime Minister readily stated it. No secret. However the video goes on to explain the tunnels were built by Hamas and showed a building , next to the hospital, which had Hamas built tunnels under it. The reporters went on to say that other tunnels were obviously built by Hamas and did not match the design of the Israel structures which they had the plans for, which they then showed and even described as a 'basement' and not as tunnels. Did you fall asleep or just get bored before the end? And this is from the same source that confirmed the baby burning, soido believe it. Hamas built tunnels, Israel built structures under the hospital as they built it but this source showed the plans and called it a 'basement'. That's a common feature under lots of buildings, hundreds of miles of tunnels are not. Mrs x "The video shows that the IDF built the tunnels under the hospital, then used them as an excuse to attack the hospital! The 200s of miles tunnels I expect will be hamas , yet again you treat the situation in Gaza like some sort of online entertainment.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two." If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Israeli IDF terrorists killed more children have been killed in recent months than in four years of conflict worldwide. That will be because Palestinians use children as soldiers and encourage them to martyr themselves. That's right, the IDF have no choice but to mass slaughter Palestine kids en masse. It's entirely someone else's fault. If they wanted to everyone in Gaza would be dead. Israelhave total air superiority. Hamas built all the tunnels under the existing infrastructure. These tunnels took decades to build and by building them here Hamas knew it would incur massive civilian casualties. Hamas wants this to suit their agenda against Israel Gazas population is crammed into small civilian areas. There is over 90% of Gaza that's unpopulated. If they wanted to limit civilian casualties whilst still building their tunnels they could have done so there, far away from the civilians but they didn't. These tunnels have been being built for decades, Hamas chose there locations, not Israel. Hamas uses children as shields, Israel retaliates to protect theirs. Huge difference but Israel are obviously eviler because they are Jews. This narrative is getting old, been going on for thousands of years. Need to find another irrational prejudice just forth sakeof balance. Mrs x The tunnels under the hospitals were built by the Israelis before they left Gaza. It was intended to be used as extra storage capacity The tunnels are longer than those of the London Underground, so storage that. It was built be Hamas, not Israel Mrs x https://youtu.be/07vX79CuYl8?si=_zwGAcDrJx7MgIeV You clearly didn't watch the whole video. It clearly states that Israel built the hospital and as such there were bunkers built underneath it. An ex Israeli Prime Minister readily stated it. No secret. However the video goes on to explain the tunnels were built by Hamas and showed a building , next to the hospital, which had Hamas built tunnels under it. The reporters went on to say that other tunnels were obviously built by Hamas and did not match the design of the Israel structures which they had the plans for, which they then showed and even described as a 'basement' and not as tunnels. Did you fall asleep or just get bored before the end? And this is from the same source that confirmed the baby burning, soido believe it. Hamas built tunnels, Israel built structures under the hospital as they built it but this source showed the plans and called it a 'basement'. That's a common feature under lots of buildings, hundreds of miles of tunnels are not. Mrs x
The video shows that the IDF built the tunnels under the hospital, then used them as an excuse to attack the hospital!
The 200s of miles tunnels I expect will be hamas , yet again you treat the situation in Gaza like some sort of online entertainment. "Look again, it described the building by Israel as a 'basement', I can actually give you a time stamp if you fancy checking this but I'm telling the truth. As for my treating Gaza like online entertainment that's a vile statement given I have said repeatedly I condemn the violence on both sides. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You're quite deluded. You keep saying IDF are terrorists, they aren't by any definition. Good point, you wouldn't want to mislabel person or group who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims as "terrorists"." That is correct. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x " As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed." Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x" Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x" Well I have proved twice on this thread how wrong you can be and you held your hands up, haven't you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? "No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him. However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist. An apology might help, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Well I have proved twice on this thread how wrong you can be and you held your hands up, haven't you?" I held my hands up to a mistake I made in regards to interpretation. As regards the Ooenly Jewish man I thought I have established that I was right. Read it how you will, I'm not bothered, this is not a competition, I'm just amazed how people can call for rights for one group but want to deny them for another. Strange Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x"It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood. that's 3 times now are you getting confused. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Well I have proved twice on this thread how wrong you can be and you held your hands up, haven't you?I held my hands up to a mistake I made in regards to interpretation. As regards the Ooenly Jewish man I thought I have established that I was right. Read it how you will, I'm not bothered, this is not a competition, I'm just amazed how people can call for rights for one group but want to deny them for another. Strange Mrs x" It is about risk, the risk of violence, shops being smashed livelyhoods destroyed because he wanted to walk through thousands of people who were demonstrating against what his country of origin was doing. And the police should let him do that. Imagine if they did and unrest occurred. We told you those demonstrators are bad, the police haven't done there jobs, Then demonstrations banned due to unrest, then no more voices against mass murder | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused."Confused? This is quite funny now. The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally... He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now. Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x"The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
"But nevertheless you are mistaken...again. The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago. The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here. And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you. If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x"Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out."Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head? I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you. I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone? Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x" If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the police | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the police" But it wasn't, and he hasnt and they are being dragged over the coals. Everyone has the right to live peaceable. Without fear that their religion would be a cause for them to be a victim of violence. Would you think the same if it was racial and a black guy was at harm because of some NF marches. What about gay marches on gay pride, shouldn't they be allowed because fundamentalist heterosexuals may try and harm them. Never mind marches, what about your wife, girlfriend or daughter should she accept that she is at an acceptable level of risk from potential rapists because her skirt was too short, was she asking for it. Or should everyone be entitled to live their lives free fir the harmful behaviours of others. Here's a radical thought, if the matches cannot control their violent urges then maybe ban the marches. Just a thought. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x"Your post. So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x
Your post.
So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD.
If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew.
Mrs x"Was that to you Ben? Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the policeBut it wasn't, and he hasnt and they are being dragged over the coals. Everyone has the right to live peaceable. Without fear that their religion would be a cause for them to be a victim of violence. Would you think the same if it was racial and a black guy was at harm because of some NF marches. What about gay marches on gay pride, shouldn't they be allowed because fundamentalist heterosexuals may try and harm them. Never mind marches, what about your wife, girlfriend or daughter should she accept that she is at an acceptable level of risk from potential rapists because her skirt was too short, was she asking for it. Or should everyone be entitled to live their lives free fir the harmful behaviours of others. Here's a radical thought, if the matches cannot control their violent urges then maybe ban the marches. Just a thought. Mrs x" To be openly jewish isn't an issue, being openly jewish during a rally against what a jewish country is doing is a problem. And I say again if the police had let this man through there would of been some sort of incident. Then as you have wrote, just ban the marches. Which was and still is the aim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x"Was Your analogy brining up the black guy. Perhaps you are the racist. "That guy" is Gideon Falter, Of course he's going to wear his skull cap and whatever because he wants to incite a riot. The police did right to stop him making things worse. You are the one who would expect the police to let him start a riot. Getting back to the racist issue and I'm not surprised a person like you is using that card on me . You should apologise for mentioning the KKK! And apologise to me and others on here for your behaviour. Jews don't necessarily mean one race either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x
Your post.
So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD.
If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew.
Mrs xWas that to you Ben?
Mrs x"It wasn't was it haha. Hello Dan, why do you have two accounts on here? Is that so you can circumnavigate a forum ban for being a naughty boy. Not very genuine is it Dan/Ben haha. You still couldn't push you both together to come up with one decent argument. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x
Your post.
So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD.
If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew.
Mrs xWas that to you Ben?
Mrs x"Yes it was go check yourself, you are not doing well today as you have been making mistakes, and insulting people. Eventhough you have been wrong. I take it that you have been taken in by the mainstream, this is or should be a lesson to broaden your news intake even if you do not like what you hear, hear it anyway because free speech is listening to what one doesn't want to hear, and then defending the person who said it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x
Your post.
So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD.
If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew.
Mrs xWas that to you Ben?
Mrs xIt wasn't was it haha.
Hello Dan, why do you have two accounts on here? Is that so you can circumnavigate a forum ban for being a naughty boy.
Not very genuine is it Dan/Ben haha. You still couldn't push you both together to come up with one decent argument.
Mrs x"Sh1t are they saying we are the same person? Couldn't make this up, this is voter OMG hahaha | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x
Your post.
So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD.
If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew.
Mrs xWas that to you Ben?
Mrs x
Yes it was go check yourself, you are not doing well today as you have been making mistakes, and insulting people.
Eventhough you have been wrong.
I take it that you have been taken in by the mainstream, this is or should be a lesson to broaden your news intake even if you do not like what you hear, hear it anyway because free speech is listening to what one doesn't want to hear, and then defending the person who said it."It wasn't to you, it was to your alter ego Dan DeLyon, stop lying Mrs c | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x
Your post.
So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD.
If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew.
Mrs xWas that to you Ben?
Mrs xIt wasn't was it haha.
Hello Dan, why do you have two accounts on here? Is that so you can circumnavigate a forum ban for being a naughty boy.
Not very genuine is it Dan/Ben haha. You still couldn't push you both together to come up with one decent argument.
Mrs x"Oh dear.. Tali g shite as usual | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x
Your post.
So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD.
If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew.
Mrs xWas that to you Ben?
Mrs xIt wasn't was it haha.
Hello Dan, why do you have two accounts on here? Is that so you can circumnavigate a forum ban for being a naughty boy.
Not very genuine is it Dan/Ben haha. You still couldn't push you both together to come up with one decent argument.
Mrs x
Sh1t are they saying we are the same person?
Couldn't make this up, this is voter OMG hahaha"When you pretend to have a conversation with someone else on here you need to remember to switch profiles, otherwise you'll be monologuing.... badly pmsl Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x You are wrong I am afraid. In the 80's it was common for there to be a demonstration for an ideal, and on the same day a demonstration for those opposing the ideal. But each demonstration took different routes and were kept separated by the police, violence occurred when groups splintered evaded the police and attacked other demonstrators. So in the here and now the police would rarely allow two demonstrations on the same day. And as I said before this gentlemen had been seen and spoken to by the police before, he has a bodyguard and camera man the 3k's example shows that one cannot walk into or stand on the sidelines of those demonstrating against them it would cause trouble and the police acted accordingly, they said sorry to soon, and the truth has now come out, he is lucky he hasn't been arrested. So twice now I have corrected your mistakes, the first being mass graves I posted a link to the evidence you state wasn't in the media. And now demonstrations, please give your head a wobble or two. If you look at my earlier, much earlier post I acknowledged the allegations of the mass graves, saying the Oalestinians allege this, the Israelis that and nothing has been proved yet. I then went on to quote from an article that confirms this. As for the media not reporting g on mass graves, I hold my hands up. What I meant to say was there were no images of what I would believe a mass grave to look like, ie a huge trench filled with dead bodies. However there are images of lots of individual graves and this can obviously constitute being mass graves. I apologise if I have caused anyone any harm or offence here. As for the Jewish man. Sky News have reported that this issue is not finished. 'A tense, extended stand-off between police and an antisemitism campaigner where he was called "openly Jewish" and threatened with arrest yards from a pro-Palestinian march was caught on film by Sky News. The footage gives context to the lengthy and fraught exchanges amid an increasingly volatile atmosphere, as the head of the Metropolitan Police faces calls to resign following the incident. Scotland Yard has already had to apologise twice after a short video clip emerged on social media, where Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was blocked by an officer close to the protest in the Aldwych area of London on Saturday 13 An initial apology by Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist had to be retracted after it suggested the presence of Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap, was "provocative", leading to a rebuke from the Home Office. Mr Twist has since offered a private meeting to Mr Falter to both apologise personally and "discuss what more the Met can do to ensure Jewish Londoners feel safe". London mayor Sadiq Khan will hold an "urgent meeting" with Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley on Monday, while Home Secretary James Cleverly and policing minister Chris Philp will also meet him this week. In the Sky News footage, the activist insisted he was only trying to cross the road down which the demonstration was passing, but this is disputed by an officer in the new footage, who said Mr Falter had deliberately walked head-on into the crowd and accused him of being "disingenuous" and seeking to "antagonise" the marchers. Sky News has decided not to identify the officer.' The Police got it wrong here. Religious tolerance should be allowed here. And the authorities are looking into this. The article I quoted was published yesterday. Mrs x As I stated before there is earlier footage, of this man in a van a flag laden van, surrounded by demonstrators who are preventing the van going any further towards the marchers. The police are recorded speaking to the van driver advising him it would be seen as stirring up trouble, as they have opposing views which have started another round of violence in the Middle East. The driver was prevented driving past the demonstration. So on seeing him again heading towards marchers with a camera man and security he was again prevented from heading towards the marchers. Now if this man wants to stir up trouble to try and show how wrong these demonstrations are by inciting violence towards him to get these demos banned, well that game is up, he has been sussed.Sure all the relevant parties have all the relevant facts. Normally though, if an individual is in the wrong, they are not offered private meetings to by the Met to apologise and discuss what they can do to make the individual feel better. The also are not contacted by government officials and they don't normally have the mayor of London look into ot for them. Now I might be wrong but it does look like people have been sussed and I'm not sure it's going to be him. Think common sense is pointing the narrative in that direction. Mrs x Are you saying that because the police thwarted an attempt to cause a possible disturbance leading to violence and riots, endangering everyone by a Zionist antagonist.. they have to apologise to that antagonist? No I'm saying as an individual everyone has rights. In this case religious rights. All he wore was a Kippah and that was enough to be a risk. The police even said if he wasn't wearing it they would not have stopped him.
However I don't suppose you will accept this, particularly in light of you describing a black person as 'suicidal' for being in the presence of a KKK March. I don't know whether you are inherently racist or just don't understand how your comments could be seen as racist.
An apology might help,
Mrs x
It was me who made the 3Ks comment, I did say it was a bad example but an example you understood.
that's 3 times now are you getting confused.Confused? This is quite funny now.
The guy I responded to stated that...if a black guy was suicidal enough to attend a KKK rally...
He said that and I responded to him, so how's confused, you can't even keep score, unless it's only own goals you are counting now.
Go read the other guys post and get back to me, it helps having facts it makes it more interesting for the reader.
Mrs x
The facts are I wrote it they made a comment to push my point as you said I should give my head a wobble, those are the facts.
But nevertheless you are mistaken...again.
The grave issue I addressed over 10 hours ago.
The Openly Jewish guy did not committed incitement and the big boys from the Met, the Government and the Mayor's office are now trying to rectify the authorities mistakes. I wasn't going to mention it but your reference to multi marches from the 80's is totally irrelevant. A single man does not make up a counter March. Trying to establish Mens Rea would be difficult here.
And as for the zKKK quote I referenced the right persons post and posted about that not you.
If I had a .ic is this the point I would drop it....BOOM haha
Mrs x
Right this is getting like all your other encounters one upmanship and you are right and such, so I am out.Before you go can you tell me when I told to Wobble your Head?
I've only ever used that phrase to one person and it wasn't you.
I'm sorry you've upset yourself by my perceived one up manship but you did start posting to me on this thread about how you've proven me wrong on a number of occasions. Irony anyone?
Yeah so if you could point out that Wobble your Head comment cos like I said I've only said it to one person... unless, no it can't be, that would be funny, no, no
Mrs x
Your post.
So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. GO WOBBLE YOUR HEAD.
If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew.
Mrs xWas that to you Ben?
Mrs xIt wasn't was it haha.
Hello Dan, why do you have two accounts on here? Is that so you can circumnavigate a forum ban for being a naughty boy.
Not very genuine is it Dan/Ben haha. You still couldn't push you both together to come up with one decent argument.
Mrs x
Oh dear.. Tali g shite as usual "Well there is no more point in this, been seen wrong with their details, has descended into farce, to go any further would be | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the policeBut it wasn't, and he hasnt and they are being dragged over the coals. Everyone has the right to live peaceable. Without fear that their religion would be a cause for them to be a victim of violence. Would you think the same if it was racial and a black guy was at harm because of some NF marches. What about gay marches on gay pride, shouldn't they be allowed because fundamentalist heterosexuals may try and harm them. Never mind marches, what about your wife, girlfriend or daughter should she accept that she is at an acceptable level of risk from potential rapists because her skirt was too short, was she asking for it. Or should everyone be entitled to live their lives free fir the harmful behaviours of others. Here's a radical thought, if the matches cannot control their violent urges then maybe ban the marches. Just a thought. Mrs x" See thats the thing a black person wouldnt be near a nf march unless ha was trying to cause trouble,why should marches be banned just because some isreali guy wanted to cause trouble,everyone can see it was all set up,the police should have arrested him | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the policeBut it wasn't, and he hasnt and they are being dragged over the coals. Everyone has the right to live peaceable. Without fear that their religion would be a cause for them to be a victim of violence. Would you think the same if it was racial and a black guy was at harm because of some NF marches. What about gay marches on gay pride, shouldn't they be allowed because fundamentalist heterosexuals may try and harm them. Never mind marches, what about your wife, girlfriend or daughter should she accept that she is at an acceptable level of risk from potential rapists because her skirt was too short, was she asking for it. Or should everyone be entitled to live their lives free fir the harmful behaviours of others. Here's a radical thought, if the matches cannot control their violent urges then maybe ban the marches. Just a thought. Mrs x See thats the thing a black person wouldnt be near a nf march unless ha was trying to cause trouble,why should marches be banned just because some isreali guy wanted to cause trouble,everyone can see it was all set up,the police should have arrested him" For what? Wearing a Kippah? He wasn't violent, offensive and the Met actually said the March would be safe for Jews. Everyone should have the right to exist free from harm, simple. The police got it wrong and questions are now being asked by some powerful people. He was within his rights, not matter what you,I, or anyone else thinks. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the policeBut it wasn't, and he hasnt and they are being dragged over the coals. Everyone has the right to live peaceable. Without fear that their religion would be a cause for them to be a victim of violence. Would you think the same if it was racial and a black guy was at harm because of some NF marches. What about gay marches on gay pride, shouldn't they be allowed because fundamentalist heterosexuals may try and harm them. Never mind marches, what about your wife, girlfriend or daughter should she accept that she is at an acceptable level of risk from potential rapists because her skirt was too short, was she asking for it. Or should everyone be entitled to live their lives free fir the harmful behaviours of others. Here's a radical thought, if the matches cannot control their violent urges then maybe ban the marches. Just a thought. Mrs x See thats the thing a black person wouldnt be near a nf march unless ha was trying to cause trouble,why should marches be banned just because some isreali guy wanted to cause trouble,everyone can see it was all set up,the police should have arrested himFor what? Wearing a Kippah? He wasn't violent, offensive and the Met actually said the March would be safe for Jews. Everyone should have the right to exist free from harm, simple. The police got it wrong and questions are now being asked by some powerful people. He was within his rights, not matter what you,I, or anyone else thinks. Mrs x" I think you should apologise for the black guy and the KKK example you gave. You should also expect the police to use common sense and exercise that. You should be ashamed of yourself for supporting a trouble maker trying to incite a riot. He deliberately intended to antagonise as much as possible so wore what he did. You would be chuffed to bits with that wouldn't you! You don't care if innocent passers by were injured in a root woul you!! Luckily the police saved the day from the likes of violent stokers like yourself | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the policeBut it wasn't, and he hasnt and they are being dragged over the coals. Everyone has the right to live peaceable. Without fear that their religion would be a cause for them to be a victim of violence. Would you think the same if it was racial and a black guy was at harm because of some NF marches. What about gay marches on gay pride, shouldn't they be allowed because fundamentalist heterosexuals may try and harm them. Never mind marches, what about your wife, girlfriend or daughter should she accept that she is at an acceptable level of risk from potential rapists because her skirt was too short, was she asking for it. Or should everyone be entitled to live their lives free fir the harmful behaviours of others. Here's a radical thought, if the matches cannot control their violent urges then maybe ban the marches. Just a thought. Mrs x See thats the thing a black person wouldnt be near a nf march unless ha was trying to cause trouble,why should marches be banned just because some isreali guy wanted to cause trouble,everyone can see it was all set up,the police should have arrested himFor what? Wearing a Kippah? He wasn't violent, offensive and the Met actually said the March would be safe for Jews. Everyone should have the right to exist free from harm, simple. The police got it wrong and questions are now being asked by some powerful people. He was within his rights, not matter what you,I, or anyone else thinks. Mrs x" for trying to incite trouble,what part of that dont you get,the police did get it wrong by not arresing him ,now everyone and their granny can see it was all set up and he was trying to cause trouble | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the policeBut it wasn't, and he hasnt and they are being dragged over the coals. Everyone has the right to live peaceable. Without fear that their religion would be a cause for them to be a victim of violence. Would you think the same if it was racial and a black guy was at harm because of some NF marches. What about gay marches on gay pride, shouldn't they be allowed because fundamentalist heterosexuals may try and harm them. Never mind marches, what about your wife, girlfriend or daughter should she accept that she is at an acceptable level of risk from potential rapists because her skirt was too short, was she asking for it. Or should everyone be entitled to live their lives free fir the harmful behaviours of others. Here's a radical thought, if the matches cannot control their violent urges then maybe ban the marches. Just a thought. Mrs x See thats the thing a black person wouldnt be near a nf march unless ha was trying to cause trouble,why should marches be banned just because some isreali guy wanted to cause trouble,everyone can see it was all set up,the police should have arrested himFor what? Wearing a Kippah? He wasn't violent, offensive and the Met actually said the March would be safe for Jews. Everyone should have the right to exist free from harm, simple. The police got it wrong and questions are now being asked by some powerful people. He was within his rights, not matter what you,I, or anyone else thinks. Mrs xfor trying to incite trouble,what part of that dont you get,the police did get it wrong by not arresing him ,now everyone and their granny can see it was all set up and he was trying to cause trouble" OK the police didn't arrest him but he committed no crime. You might not agree with his actions but that doesn't make something criminal. You need two parts, Actus Reus and Mens Rea. So the physical act and his mental state at the time of committing the act. It's hard to prove both elements, in particular the mental element. Just from a common sense point of view do you think these big wigs would be arsed if the guy was banged torights here? They wouldn't and they are only getting involved because the police overstepped their powers. It may have been common sense but common sense is not a defence in law. I'm not even saying I agree with the guy in question. All I am saying is that everyone should have the same protections under the law. In this case the police got it wrong by not protecting the guy because he was 'openly jewish' and that's wrong. That's all I'm saying, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a slight aside but still linked I read and watched with amazement the police in London telling a Jewish man he could be arrested as he was openly Jewish near a Palestinian march. Apparently he would be causing a breach of the peace. It was better though that the police apologised, but should such an attitude ever have happened. The Jewish guy is Gideon Falter, a journalist and chief executive of the campaign against anti-Semitism. He's been wandering into palisitinian demos a few times openly Jewish in the hope of stirring trouble and get the met police commissioner in the shit. Thats is the guy The police should have jailed him for trying to incite trouble The police will have CCTV and recordings of people of interest, as they had come across him before in his flag laden van then I am sure he became a person of interest. So on seeing him coming towards the crowd they stopped him and explained their reason and moved him on no violence occurred it was filmed and is on YouTube along with other footage from the public.Haven't the Met apologised to him? Mrs x He should apologise to the met for stirring trouble and wasting police time! So if a black guy was at a KKK rally, then he should be arrested for being 'openly black'. Go wobble your head. If you go on a March you should expect some opposing views. It's rich when you say he should have been arrested but place no blame on the 'peaceful' Palestinian supporters who wanted to be violent to an individual for how he looked. But it .just be his fault because he is a Jew. Mrs xwere they violent ? Or was this the police acting in advance to keep the peace. I haven't seen either the cut vid nor the longer vid, but am suspicious of his motives given his roles in various organisations and bringing body guards. He's looking for the (possibly few) people to get a ride. As in another thread we know that will get the coverage. Also, can you clarify. Were the babies intentionally set on fire. Or was it like the "beheadings" where tj doctor said it could have even from shrapnel? As if it's like the later than I suspect IDF have burned babies alive from their bombs. Language is important here. For any organised protest or March to take place you have to apply for permission. You have to include things such as potential numbers, reasons for March, preferred route etc. If you are granted permission it does not mean you have total autonomy over the route. Others are allowed there too. I have not seen anything about the incident bit for an individual to be threatened with arrest for being 'openly Jewish' would appear dubious at best. Appearance is not against the law. It's not even an excuse to cite incitement as a crime for this. Like said before, imagine the uproar, if someone else was singled out for their appearance due to their race, sexual orientation, gender etc. Surely it's more of an issue for those Marching, if you person had the possibility to enflamed those marching into violence due to their appearance. Doesn't appear to be a peaceful movement if religious garb could explode into violence. Maybe the March shouldn't have been granted. Maybe the marchers should not have given the impression that they may vommitt violence in this circumstance, ignoring any protest and showed themselves to be the 'better' for doing so. The police obviously didn't think they were capable of doing this, that they would attack this man, due to him being 'openly Jewish'. This is wrong on somany levels. Mrs x If this happened in scotland and a guy with a celtic top wanted to walk through an orange walk or a rangers fan tried to go through a repubican march,they would be arrested and charged with trying to incite trouble,so well done to the policeBut it wasn't, and he hasnt and they are being dragged over the coals. Everyone has the right to live peaceable. Without fear that their religion would be a cause for them to be a victim of violence. Would you think the same if it was racial and a black guy was at harm because of some NF marches. What about gay marches on gay pride, shouldn't they be allowed because fundamentalist heterosexuals may try and harm them. Never mind marches, what about your wife, girlfriend or daughter should she accept that she is at an acceptable level of risk from potential rapists because her skirt was too short, was she asking for it. Or should everyone be entitled to live their lives free fir the harmful behaviours of others. Here's a radical thought, if the matches cannot control their violent urges then maybe ban the marches. Just a thought. Mrs x See thats the thing a black person wouldnt be near a nf march unless ha was trying to cause trouble,why should marches be banned just because some isreali guy wanted to cause trouble,everyone can see it was all set up,the police should have arrested himFor what? Wearing a Kippah? He wasn't violent, offensive and the Met actually said the March would be safe for Jews. Everyone should have the right to exist free from harm, simple. The police got it wrong and questions are now being asked by some powerful people. He was within his rights, not matter what you,I, or anyone else thinks. Mrs xfor trying to incite trouble,what part of that dont you get,the police did get it wrong by not arresing him ,now everyone and their granny can see it was all set up and he was trying to cause troubleOK the police didn't arrest him but he committed no crime. You might not agree with his actions but that doesn't make something criminal. You need two parts, Actus Reus and Mens Rea. So the physical act and his mental state at the time of committing the act. It's hard to prove both elements, in particular the mental element. Just from a common sense point of view do you think these big wigs would be arsed if the guy was banged torights here? They wouldn't and they are only getting involved because the police overstepped their powers. It may have been common sense but common sense is not a defence in law. I'm not even saying I agree with the guy in question. All I am saying is that everyone should have the same protections under the law. In this case the police got it wrong by not protecting the guy because he was 'openly jewish' and that's wrong. That's all I'm saying, Mrs x" The common sense thing to do is not look for trouble, which he was and the fact he has previous for it means he was well aware what he was doing,it was a 100% a set up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
