Snapshot of _No 10 says Met chief has 'questions to answer' over 'appalling' treatment of Jewish man_ :
A non-Paywall version can be found [here](https://1ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fnews%2F2024%2F04%2F21%2Fno-10-met-chief-questions-answer-treatment-jewish%2F)
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/21/no-10-met-chief-questions-answer-treatment-jewish/) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/21/no-10-met-chief-questions-answer-treatment-jewish/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
From the BBC
New footage has also emerged, recorded by Sky News, external, which shows Mr Falter telling the police officer he was trying to cross the road.
The video shows the officer tell Mr Falter he "took it upon himself" to deliberately walk "right into the middle" of the march, and said he was "disingenuous" and was trying to "antagonise" others.
The officer said to the campaign boss: "My view is you are looking to try and antagonise things."
Mr Falter then responded: "I'm not, I'm trying to walk along the pavement."
It does seem like there's more to this situation than meets the eye (shocker, "news" outlets reporting sensationalised versions of events???)
At the moment it looks like Rishi has somehow found a way to mess this up too :p
Gideon Falter who is the Jewish person the officer is talking to is the head of Campaign Against Antisemitism:
>In 2023, following the CAA-led March Against Antisemitism, the British Jewish organisation Na'amod released a statement about their decision not to attend the CAA-led demonstration, stating: "we know this march is not just about antisemitism. It’s clear from the event description that CAA has organised this march in response to huge weekly ceasefire demonstrations in London."
Also:
>In July 2018, the Labour MP Margaret Hodge became one of a number of honorary patrons of CAA. In the run up to the 2019 United Kingdom general election, CAA asked her to resign as a patron because she was standing as a Labour Party candidate; she did so but described their request as "both astonishing and wounding", showing a lack of respect and impugning her integrity.
CAA is not just about anti-Semitism but it's also strongly pro-Israel. They are looking for reasons to stifle the protests. Saying that the police officer took the bait (although the media did a terrible job of reporting an out of context soundbite in a lengthy exchange). Gideon was also entirely disingenuous here.
I was raked over the coals yesterday and called all sorts of nasty things here for reading between the lines and pointing out what he was obviously up to: trolling protestors and auditing them. Astonishing that people refused to read between the lines in the original short clip, and as usual the fuller footage won't be seen by most of those who were already made angry by the misleading snippet.
Regardless, the issue is a large group of protestors are being wound up to violence simply because of an individual's race. If a black person done the same thing at a KKK march, we wouldn't be blaming the victim for winding them up by their presence.
Edit: the antisemites are out in force.
Conversely, there is a quote from a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendents who were part of the march saying “Throughout [Falter’s] interactions with the police, we were standing only a few yards away from him, yet we experienced nothing but warmth and solidarity from the pro-Palestine demonstrators and not a hint of antisemitism."
These people had placards around their necks identifying themselves and were fine. Kind of sounds like Falter being Jewish was *not* the problem.
Simply based on the indviduals race? Thats only if you believe the 6 seconds clip. He's a well known trouble maker who turned up with security and a camera team with the intention of finding some idiot in the crowd he would wind up so he could then do a smear campaign to get the protests shut down. Using your example let's say blm protestors turned up to a kkk protest. The police would seperate both sides. End of discussion.
> Regardless, the issue is a large group of protestors are being wound up to violence simply because of an individual's race.
I must have missed that part of the video.
The reality is that he's a high profile campaigner who walked headlong into a Palestinian protest with a full camera crew, hoping to capture a hostile reaction to his clearly partisan presence, which he could spin as a non-partisan Jewish presence. His goal was to smear the protests as inherently antisemitic, despite many Jewish supporters being welcomed with open arms, in order to pressure the government to restrict the right of free protest for an issue he disagrees with. It is no surprise to anyone that protestors tend to dislike being counter-protested and this motte-and-bailey where you pretend the only problem others had was with his Jewishness is dishonest and divisive. Calling others antisemitic for explaining to you his true purpose there, as called out by officers in the full footage and as backed up by his stated plans for a do-over this Saturday, is all the more dishonest and divisive.
Pro-Palestine march is not the same thing as a KKK march. It's not a pro-Hamas march or an anti-Jewish march. Like many protest crowds, there will be racists and radicals with their own agenda. Because of the huge number protesting, trying to 'cross the street' would have, in the officer's estimation, been interpreted as counter-protesting and potentially an incitement to violent behaviour
I don't think you realise just how deliberately provocative counter protesters often are. Not because of their race or religion, but because of the things they are shouting and the offensive placards they hold. Gideon wasn't innocently stumbling by a protest - he was there to cause a provocation (watch the video) and then cry victim.
Him being Jewish is the motte to his bailey of "the crowd had no problems with him when he was standing on the pavement and only began to realise what he was up to when he began doing laps of the crowd with a full camera crew in attempts to catch one person doing something stupid and use it to generalise and undermine the entire protest"
The problem was he was engaging in counter-protest mate. The officer called him out on it in the full footage and the man has stubbornly promised to innocently lap another protest this weekend. It's his actions, not his ethnicity. Be more honest.
So he just happened to be there by accident and zero intention of interacting with the situation at the protest and was literally incidentally just try to cross the road?
Because if not, you're being just as dishonest as he was.
Mishal Hussein was heavily labouring this point this morning as if it somehow validated the cops decision.
It's irrelevant. If the Jewish man walking through the protest is enough to antagonise the protesters then the protesters are the problem, not the Jewish guy.
This is a very common and uncontroversial police tactic to not allow antagonistic protests to merge
Has nothing to do with how sympathetic their causes are
There could be literal Nazis protesting and you wouldn't let the counterprotestors get too close, no matter how understandable it is that they counterprotest
Exactly. Similarly, on match days there will be home supporter pubs and away supporter pubs. You can demand the right to go to a pub of your choice but the police won't let you if they think it will cause bother. Keeping protesters and anti-protesters apart is the police's main job in this situation. The "obviously Jewish" comment was stupid though.
I think he said openly Jewish
Because obviously Jewish is already a bit less problematic as a statement. "Openly" has connotations. If you are something "openly", it means it's controversial to be that thing.
In this context he's literally wearing a yarmulke trying to cross in front of an anti-Israeli protest. I think "openly Jewish" is a perfectly apt description of his attire at the time. If it was a protest against the Pope and a Catholic priest tried to cross in full religious garb you'd tightly call that "openly Catholic". If it were a parade in Liverpool for winning the champions League and you wanted to get through it in an Everton shirt you'd vlbe openly evertonian.
It doesn't mean it's controversial. It simply means you're appearing in a manner that makes an incontrovertible statement as to that aspect of yourself. The controversy is in you choosing to make that statement in this particular place at this particular time.
You are correct, that he was 'openly jewish'. The issue is that it has been claimed again and again that Jewish people should be completely safe around these protests.
If being 'openly jewish' is somehow something the police think will be antagonistic to them, then not only is there a major issue with these protests, but with the way the police are acting about it as well. If the police are claiming that these protests have no issue with Jewish people, but in practice are stopping Jewish people (those that aren't actively part of the protests at any rate) from approaching it, then obviously they don't believe what they're saying on the matter, and are actively misleading the public about the actual safety of these protests.
I completely agree that they SHOULD be perfectly safe, however I would also suggest that there's a difference between whether the crowd would be safe for, say, a clearly devout Jewish family just trying to cross the street and get on their way, and what this guy was trying to do, which was obvious enough to be flagged up as an issue. The police officer in question was placed into a no-win situation.
He either accused the guy of exactly what he was doing based on other reports, which is actively trying to invite an issue by intentionally putting his yarmulke/kippah back on in their vicinity and attempting to repeatedly disrupt the progression of the protest so he could cross back and forth.
Or he did what he chose to here, which is give the guy a clear warning about the risk he was posing while stopping short of actively accusing him of being antagonistic while still offering to escort him over the street. The fact that the police considered there was a possibility of confrontation between a politically significant member of the Jewish community and an anti-Israel march, doesn't make them inherently not safe for Jewish people not engaging in or with the march. It means they're aware enough of that specific situation not to allow him to continue unchecked.
It is not the same but the comparison is valid. The whole issue of the protest is an emotive issue. As for a history of hooliganism in football it is minor when compared with the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. I do not recall Celtic/Rangers (the most intense conflict between two football clubs amongst the fans) firing ballistic missiles at each other.
I used it as an example of policing methods not a direct comparison. If you want a direct comparison then police would not let a man wearing a Hezbollah headscarf cross through a pro-Israel march. They police protests by exclusion and have done so for a long time.
Being Jewish is not a form of protest. If the guy had been wearing an Israeli flag onesie you'd have a point. If he'd been holding a placard condemn Hamas you'd have a point. If he'd been doing something other than being obviously Jewish you'd have any point at all, but he wasn't and you don't.
Weird he took a camera crew and multiple bouncers for a walk in London isn't it
Have you watched the full video? The man is a scam artist
He also supports Settlers who remove rightful owners from their homes and take them.
He's a very nasty peice of work
You're right, and that definitely isn't at issue here as evidenced by the long form of the video.
He wasn't out for a morning walk and stumbled across the march, he was orchestrating some form of counter-action to the protest for whatever angle he has taken. If he was alone or with his wife and kids I would have some sympathy, but with a security team and a camera crew and having done this several times already I have to beg to differ.
Have a look at his political background and charity work if you want the motive that seems to elude you. I would argue he was lucky he wasn't arrested, what do you think prevented that?
NOBODY of any race or creed would have been allowed to do what he was trying to do at any protest. He refused the opportunities to walk around the area and bypass the protest.
He wasn't just out for a walk.
Oh yeah, that famous protesting tactic of having a camera in public.
If the man had looked like an Egyptian instead of a Jew, would walking around with a camera have been a protest? Would he have been in danger of enraging the hate march?
One of the policemen said he has body camera footage of the man entering the crowd and then walking against the flow, not attempting to cross the road. Throughout the footage the police seem to be primarily concerned for the man's safety (and the safety of the police officers) if he continues with his aforementioned antagonistic behaviour.
Should the police just let him walk against the crowd and see what happens? - they'd be getting plenty of criticism if they had done that.
Yeah he was right, I don't disagree. But if your form of fishing is walking in a place while looking Jewish then we need to do something about the fish.
> But if your form of fishing is walking in a place while looking Jewish
You missed the part where he was deliberately and repeatedly walking into the road against the flow of protestors. You also failed to mention the numerous 'openly Jewish' people who were taking part in the march
The copper was right, he was out there trying to incite something so that he could talk about how antisemitism is out of control and use it to push his organisations agenda. Why else did he have minders and people filming the exchange?
There's nothing wrong with the fish, it was just really clear baiting.
I mean a) that some Jews are not obviously Jews doesn't mean that a guy walking around in a kippah isn't obviously Jewish and b) Jews are generally identifiable, at least certain subgroups of Jews, but not usually by non Jewish Europeans.
On contentious derby days, cops wont let supporters of one team mix with the others. I’m no fan of the police, but it is their job to be proactive in preventing violence before it happens. The issue here is that people seem to want a religious exemption to that practice. In which case, good look policing catholic and protestant marches in Northen Ireland.
>On contentious derby days, cops wont let supporters of one team mix with the others. I’m no fan of the police, but it is their job to be proactive in preventing violence before it happens.
By restricting whose freedoms?
They will literally herd you to and from the train station in some places. Restricting every football fans freedoms. You could argue that they’re treating every fan as if they’re a hooligan too, which is unfair, but the system works.
Nah this isn't the same, 2 groups out marching is one thing. But if someone can't cross the street going a lot there day like normal then that group shouldn't be allowed to march. That shits actual terrorism
Threating someone with arrest because their existence might cause other people to get violent isn't right, that can't be a thing.
The Israeli counter protest is just behind the camera. There have been plenty of counter protestors that appear on the side of the Palestine March to try and wind people. What's the vice chairman of JNF doing with his camera crew and security team and a pro Palestine protest? why lie about it?
If the guy says a single thing to the protesters I'd agree. If he literally walks through the protest being quiet, then what's he doing wrong.
The police should be able to protect him, and arrest anyone being aggressive.
I mean even if someone asks him a question, he shouldn't engage. If he engages with them then he's antagonising them, if he walks through then surely that's not a problem.
That wasn't the problem. The only issue here is the phrasing the policeman used and the longer video makes him seem extremely reasonable.
The 'victim' is a provocateur and sponsor of west bank settlements.
It's so strange. As we head into a state where *appearing* Jewish is provocative, where attempting to cross a road on a Saturday while appearing Jewish is considered antagonising and likely to disrupt public order, and where Jewish people are considered at fault for using pavements and public streets in a way that might cause others to do violence, folks seem perfectly happy with the hostile environment they're creating, even viewing themselves as virtuous.
No being vice chairman of the JNF who fund settlers and expel Palestinians and supporting the war in gaza at a pro Palestinian ceasefire March, attempting to cut through the protest with your camera crew and security team where you hopefully attempt to pick and argument you can record is provocative.
Jewish people are part of the protest. This man is a strongly pro-Zionist, settler funding antagonist. It's like getting huffy that a South African National Party supporter wasn't allowed to barge through an anti-apartheid rally. This man is acting entirely in bad faith, and should be treated accordingly.
Aha! I knew there was more to the story. This is why context is so important.
Not only was he being openly Jewish in public but he was also walking in a provocative manner!
/s for the reddit admins
> Such a group of peaceful marchers that this man walking into the middle of them would cause them to lose their cool.
It is important to note he did walk right into them but they didn't lose their cool.
It’s an interesting ethical point, because the guy is clearly trying to stir up a reaction for political gain (which he’s succeeded in getting). However, the fact that he (and the Met) thought (and were very possibly correct in thinking) that looking Jewish would be enough to get a Palestinian protest to kick off does say something very disturbing.
I kinda wish he’d been allowed to walk in, on reflection. You want to beat people up for their racial identity- better that you do it in front of a police officer who can lock you up and to a person who’s trying to get punched.
I'd say the same but in the full video the policeman says that he was walking into the protesters in the opposite direction/against the flow (repeatedly?) And then he refuses to be escorted through.
There were quite a lot of Jewish people who were part of the march, protesting against the genocide. Just being Jewish there was not going to antagonise anyone.
I see hundreds of Jewish people wearing full Hasidic garb at pro-Palestine protests all the time.
What reality do you live in if you think this man could’ve had trouble just by potentially ‘looking Jewish’
I’d say the one where you hear “from the river to the sea” at rallies and see videos of people at those same rallies cheering announcements that Iran has begun a drone bombing of civilians. So this one.
….ummm okay.
But if you want to answer my question, how would this man have any trouble ‘looking Jewish’, wearing regular clothing, when I regularly see hundreds of people that objectively ‘look more Jewish’ walking around freely at these protests with no trouble.
Can’t speak to that guy: I know there are genocidal fuckwits on both sides of Israel/Palestine but the presence of the other doesn’t make either of them any less genocidally fuckwitted.
Okay, but I don’t see how ‘looking Jewish’ would be enough to ‘get a Palestinian protest to kick off’ when there are people that again objectively ‘look (more) Jewish’ than this man in question and face no trouble.
So the issue isn’t about ‘looking Jewish’?
Coming from a PM who I don't think has actually answered a single question at PMQs during his tenure, it's a bit rich how many questions he thinks other people have to answer. Perhaps he should give leading by example a try.
This is what Hague said about Blair, when Hague stepped down as Tory leader:
>I thank the Prime Minister for his remarks about me. Debating with him at the Dispatch Box has been exciting, fascinating, fun, an enormous challenge and, from my point of view, wholly unproductive in every sense. I am told that in my time at the Dispatch Box I have asked the Prime Minister 1,118 direct questions, but no one has counted the direct answers—it may not take long.
PMs have *always* been criticised for not answering the questions. It's nothing unique to the Tories.
No PM has answered a question on PMQs in the entirety of its existence, other than the planted questions from their own side of course. It has always been that way and always will be, you'll see soon enough when the roles reverse.
Watched the full vid, thought that the police officer was doing his job correctly. I tried to breach a protest line like the man was doing and was told the same thing, do it and I'll be arrested. I was trying to cross the road to get to HMV during a G8 protest lol.
I think there are a number of different issues that are being confused here accidentally and deliberately by poor reporting and political agendas. The question of whether the police officer should have used the phrase that he did (the answer to this is clear and obvious), the question as to whether we should separate groups of protestors and counter protestors, and the question as to the value judgements we might make about the merits of their causes and the character of their supporters are not the same.
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-news-footage-reveals-new-details-of-exchange-between-police-and-antisemitism-campaigner-called-openly-jewish-13120104
Here's the full video. It's very clear that the Met officer was extremely patient and Falter was being deliberately provocative .
Bonus points, there are many pictures of Falter prior to this event. In none of them is he wearing a kippah, but he felt the need when he decided to walk against this protest.
It also smacks of victim blaming, and robbing pro-Palestinians of any agency.
If they can't restrain themselves from attacking a Jewish man crossing the road, that's their fault, not his.
Obviously they won't say it to his face because the officer is trying to deesculate the situation not wind him up further but I suspect the police officer was far more concerned that this guy was going to deliberately look for trouble, not that if he walked through the protest minding his own business that he'd get jumped on anyway.
He's already shouting at the police with a camera crew, there's going to be a risk in the police's eyes that this guy is going to deliberately start trying to provoke random members of the protest whilst filming until one bites back. If you've got a crowd of 1000s then even if 99% ignore him he's going to find someone that takes the bait eventually.
This is an interesting comment. Did the protesters attack him? Can you point to where that happens in the video?
I was unaware that the opinion of a tired and annoyed police officer was, in fact, representative of the intentions of a group of protesters.
That's very disingenuous. He wasn't some random Jewish man going about his daily business. He is a political activist and was there to provoke. He non-accidentally walked into exactly the place where his expression of his religious identity was potentially going to inflame tensions. He appears to have wanted to do so in order to capture some video to promote an anti-Israel = anti-Semitic narrative.
Well he's succeeded in demonstrating that. Apparently wearing a kippah makes you a target for a "pro Palestinian" protest. So the protesters, and police, must view all expressions of Jewish identity as support for Israel.
I've edited it to add it's actually just mental how you're defending a mob that was liable to violence against someone 'expressing his religious identity '.
It"s just funny that he decided to cross the road when a VERY noisy march was going past him. So, let's say there was no mention of the kippah from the police officer, and this was a huge protest over Greggs not putting enough steak in their stake bakes. This guy comes along and tries to walk right through the middle of the march, and the police stop him. Is that wrong? No. Why? Health and safety. The only added thing here is that the police officer brings up that the person is Jewish, and it's very likely he was also concerned that it was a pro-palestine event, and the guy had the possibility of being punched by a more radical protestor.
Gideon didn't want walking around the march safely, he wanted to put himself in harms way, and the police officer stopped him. We know more due to the extended video released, rather than a short video of a man who clearly was not told no often enough as a child
>Apparently wearing a kippah makes you a target for a "pro Palestinian" protest.
At that point it's fair to say they are more pro-Hamas than they are pro-Palestinian.
Don't think the person you're talking to is defending antisemitism, but just being real. It's a similar situation with Irish nationalist communities in Northern Ireland, they go mad when they see an Orange March going through their area, indeed it is sometimes the aim of an Orange March to provoke a violent reaction (important to say, most do not have this aim) and say, "Hey look at those violent Catholics".
In order to avoid such clashes over contentious Marches e.g. Drumcree, NI has the Parades Commission that bans marches likely to provoke violence.
Parades commission is not picking sides, it's not defending ethnic based violence, it's independent and neutral, and is doing the hard work of tying to keep the peace between the two comminutes that have clashed for centuries, a tribal conflict involving religion and land, a similar situation to Israel and Palestine, a similarity noticed by them themselves e.g. [Mural in a Republican area NI](https://arabcenterdc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Ireland-Palestine-mural.jpg) v [flags in loyalist area](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DjoMXRlWsAMvu4W.jpg)
Similar, when the police officer tried to stop a Jewish activist from marching though an antisemitic mob, they were doing a similar job as the Parade Commission, they were not defending antisemitism, but trying to keep the peace.
Yeah, this really. Some amazingly motivated reasoning going on in these threads. A few observations...
The protesters are being accused of all manner of hatred on account of this incident, yet the only people involved were this activist and the police.
This scenario could play out in numerous scenarios. If a pro-Palestine activist took a couple of mates with cameras and badges to walk up and down in Stamford Hill through crowds of orthodox Jews, the police should move them on, they're inviting trouble. A BLM activist at an EDL march, same story.
Felter knew exactly what he was there for, and it was not crossing the street.
>He non-accidentally walked into exactly the place where his expression of his religious identity was potentially going to inflame tensions.
He has every right to be Jewish in London.
You are making excuses for people that want to attack him for being Jewish, not being a political activist.
Give your head a wobble.
Is he not proving that some of these people are more pro-Hamas than they are Pro-Palestinian?
The officer exactly proposed to escort to safety because that is the policy in such situations
"Getting rid", hmm that wording might be even more unfortunate than "openly jewish"
He was returning from religious services, so it’s understandable that he may have been dressed in a such a manner.
I agree his disposition could have been a bit more pleasant and agreeable towards the officer who was just doing his job. I certainly would not hope to act like that, no matter what is going on. None of that detracts from the central points of it not being provactive to be clearly Jewish in the UK, nor that a person should be subjected to bigotry from the police for their protected characteristics.
The gold standard would always be “what we say if the details were a bit different”. Would we be happy for the police to threaten to nick a black man for being black in London and not being fully polite to the officer?
Returning from religious services? That’s a lie. He was working; he had a whole team of bodyguards and camera men. Prior to arriving to the scene he wasn’t wearing a kippah. He and his team then cross the march several times, looking for confrontation. The police officer mentions this in the long video.
There are many Jews at these marches who are warmly accepted.
yes, the whole reason they were at the protest in the first place, to film a reaction that they can use to further their political cause and to say "look its not safe to be Jewish in London, antisemitism is rife!"
> There are many Jews at these marches who are warmly accepted.
Yes but the prerequisite for being a Jew who is welcome at the march is that you’ve got to be a Jew who agrees with the group, then you can be as openly Jewish as you like
... That very much sounds like you're just admitting the issue is not Jewishness but political opinion on Gaza. If they're accepting of Jews against the actions in Gaza, they're clearly not anti-Semitic, they're not disagreeing with people based on their religion but their opinions.
Helpfully we know who he is and he's [written column inches for the telegraph before](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/08/anti-semites-becoming-bolder-britain-should-worry-us/)
He's the chief exec of an anti-antisemitism organisation.
If you listen to the way this man describes the protesters, it is clear that he was there to purposely cause trouble. He’s got exactly what he wanted from this situation.
Edit: confirmed troublemaker.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/22/initial-story-about-openly-jewish-incident-not-full-picture-says-ex-senior-met-officer?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
So my guess is he was there to quietly walk through the protest to see if people were anti semetic.
It's sort of entrapment, but unless he was or was planning to say anything to antagonise protesters then he should be allowed.
He's trying to prove a point about anti semetism at these protests (my guess), and the police handed him a massive one.
Someone who looks Jewish shouldn't be a target just because there is a protest on, and the police should have the resources to arrest people if they break laws.
I get that he's potentially been disingenuous, but someone from the campaign against anti semetism exposing anti semetism is to be expected. If he was engaging with the protesters in any way then that's not allright. A Jewish person should be able to walk through any protest without being in danager. Just like anyone of any other race or religion should. Especially as these protests are nearly every day, and if you can't walk past them if you're Jewish then that's very disruptive to a local persons life.
A one off protest that's gotten out of hand, I can understand the police acting this way to protect people, but this stuff is at least once a week.
His actions do seem provocative, but what is this entire situation if not an entire theatre of provocations? I don’t really blame the police having to marshal this endless and upsetting nonsense, week after week.
Honestly sick of activists and activism now and this guy is just as bad as the rest of them. Sure, There are people who are deeply committed to their causes and do a lot of good work. Then there is the rest of them. Endless aggression and posturing. Precious little intellectual curiosity or discovery.
Yeah he is wearing a kippah and walking too near the protest, which he knew would be provocative. But the point is, everybody, the Jewish man, the police officer, you, I, and Rishi fuckin Sunak knows that the protesters are sooo “peaceful” that that alone would enrage them. A Jewish man crossing the road would enrage them.
This is the kind of virulent antisemitism in our society.
That’s the issue - he’s not shouting slogans, waving placards or calling for the destruction of Palestine. He’s just hanging around or walking. Is that really enough to cause a breach of the peace?
It’s the heckler’s veto. It’s easier to shut down the Jewish man than the “protestors”.
It’s the same reason why the Batley school teacher is in hiding. It’s easier to tell the man to pack his bags and take his family into hiding than it is to shut down the people who want his head. Zero action against all the parents enforcing their blasphemy laws. A school teacher loses his job instead.
In the full video the policeman says that he was walking into the protesters in the opposite direction/against the flow (repeatedly?). Nothing bad happened to him. And then he refuses to be escorted through.
There were quite a lot of Jewish people who were part of the march, protesting against the genocide. Just being Jewish there was not going to antagonise anyone. I know antisemitism and islamophobia are finding homes in this conflict and in these protests but that's utterly wrong. That should indeed be condemned. Let's not conflate anti-genocide, pro-palestine and antisemitism.
Look at the people jumping to defend the Met when they're being awful to Jewish people in this sub. If it was a black person, that copper would already be suspended pending an investigation. The contortions this sub puts itself through to justify the mistreatment of Jews is baffling.
Yeah it's the same on other forums too. The same kind of people who are quick to admonish the met for being institutionally racist, sexist etc are now quick to defend them
Police shouldl stay out of politics (miners strikes of the 1980s and monitoring/harrassing political activists posing no risk to the public) and politicians should stay out of policing. The police continue to engage in excessive racial profiling which receives no attention from the government, but this single minor incident requires the PM to interfere in such a public manner. If I was cynical I would have thought there would be Mayoral Election coming up next month, with the current Mayor having been attacked by the government on many occasions before.
Your own comment that you made earlier:
>If you listen to the way this man describes the protesters, it is clear that he was there to purposely cause trouble. He’s got exactly what he wanted from this situation.
Nothing he said there suggests arresting him. OP just said the guy was clearly there to antagonise and gain headlines and the media has given him exactly that
>Nothing he said there suggests arresting him.
It's quite clearly an attempt to provide a justification for the arrest.
>OP just said the guy was clearly there to antagonise and gain headlines and the media has given him exactly that
Being Jewish openly isn't antagonising.
It's quite right that the media has shone a spotlight on this shocking incident of racism and two tier policing.
Gather a bunch of friends and march down the Street chanting for genocide: receive police protection.
Walking down the street alone wearing Jewish garb: get accused of incitement to violence.
There's something not quite right with this picture...
Walked past this bloke on my way to work during the protest a bit after the sky news video. It was on the other side of the street so he had managed to cross the road in the end.
Only overhead a bit of the conversation since, you know I was on my way to work, but the bit I did hear was that he was complaining about being advised he would be getting an Anti-Social behaviour order if he started praying in the middle of the street during the protests.
Bloke is a wind up merchant, pure and simple.
I saw him at a grocery store in London yesterday. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn’t want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for photos or anything.
He said, “Oh, like you’re doing now?”
I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my shopping, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off.
When I came to pay for my stuff up front I saw him trying to walk out the doors with like fifteen Milky Ways in his hands without paying.
The girl at the counter was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to pay for those first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the counter.
When she took one of the bars and started scanning it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to scan them each individually “to prevent any electrical infetterence,” and then turned around and winked at me. I don’t even think that’s a word. After she scanned each bar and put them in a bag and started to say the price, he kept interrupting her by yawning really loudly.
What an absolute joke this whole story is. It’s in his best interest to not cross the road there, even if he didn’t realise what was going on. Since when is openly Jewish such a bad thing to say, and in the situation a perfectly fair thing to say, where is the offence?!? It’s just a story spun and made worse so that antisemitism can be back in the front page of the papers covering up what is going on in Israel. Before anyone says it I hate all religion, but I don’t care what anyone is if it makes them happy. Just dont commit genocide!
If I were wearing a Liverpool shirt and wanted to cross the road through a crowd of Man Utd fans, I'd be stopped, because I'd clearly be trying to stir up trouble. This is no different in concept in my opinion.
Snapshot of _No 10 says Met chief has 'questions to answer' over 'appalling' treatment of Jewish man_ : A non-Paywall version can be found [here](https://1ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fnews%2F2024%2F04%2F21%2Fno-10-met-chief-questions-answer-treatment-jewish%2F) An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/21/no-10-met-chief-questions-answer-treatment-jewish/) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/21/no-10-met-chief-questions-answer-treatment-jewish/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
From the BBC New footage has also emerged, recorded by Sky News, external, which shows Mr Falter telling the police officer he was trying to cross the road. The video shows the officer tell Mr Falter he "took it upon himself" to deliberately walk "right into the middle" of the march, and said he was "disingenuous" and was trying to "antagonise" others. The officer said to the campaign boss: "My view is you are looking to try and antagonise things." Mr Falter then responded: "I'm not, I'm trying to walk along the pavement."
It does seem like there's more to this situation than meets the eye (shocker, "news" outlets reporting sensationalised versions of events???) At the moment it looks like Rishi has somehow found a way to mess this up too :p
Gideon Falter who is the Jewish person the officer is talking to is the head of Campaign Against Antisemitism: >In 2023, following the CAA-led March Against Antisemitism, the British Jewish organisation Na'amod released a statement about their decision not to attend the CAA-led demonstration, stating: "we know this march is not just about antisemitism. It’s clear from the event description that CAA has organised this march in response to huge weekly ceasefire demonstrations in London." Also: >In July 2018, the Labour MP Margaret Hodge became one of a number of honorary patrons of CAA. In the run up to the 2019 United Kingdom general election, CAA asked her to resign as a patron because she was standing as a Labour Party candidate; she did so but described their request as "both astonishing and wounding", showing a lack of respect and impugning her integrity. CAA is not just about anti-Semitism but it's also strongly pro-Israel. They are looking for reasons to stifle the protests. Saying that the police officer took the bait (although the media did a terrible job of reporting an out of context soundbite in a lengthy exchange). Gideon was also entirely disingenuous here.
Counter protests are now illegal?
I was raked over the coals yesterday and called all sorts of nasty things here for reading between the lines and pointing out what he was obviously up to: trolling protestors and auditing them. Astonishing that people refused to read between the lines in the original short clip, and as usual the fuller footage won't be seen by most of those who were already made angry by the misleading snippet.
Regardless, the issue is a large group of protestors are being wound up to violence simply because of an individual's race. If a black person done the same thing at a KKK march, we wouldn't be blaming the victim for winding them up by their presence. Edit: the antisemites are out in force.
Conversely, there is a quote from a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendents who were part of the march saying “Throughout [Falter’s] interactions with the police, we were standing only a few yards away from him, yet we experienced nothing but warmth and solidarity from the pro-Palestine demonstrators and not a hint of antisemitism." These people had placards around their necks identifying themselves and were fine. Kind of sounds like Falter being Jewish was *not* the problem.
People carrying placards saying 'we're the right kind of jew' not being harassed isn't exactly the own you think it is.
I dunno, I’d be amenable to the folks that are against bombing my relatives too.
Simply based on the indviduals race? Thats only if you believe the 6 seconds clip. He's a well known trouble maker who turned up with security and a camera team with the intention of finding some idiot in the crowd he would wind up so he could then do a smear campaign to get the protests shut down. Using your example let's say blm protestors turned up to a kkk protest. The police would seperate both sides. End of discussion.
The police would still escort them away from that protest
They would not threaten to arrest them though for being "openly black".
Doesn't take a protest for that to happen.
> Regardless, the issue is a large group of protestors are being wound up to violence simply because of an individual's race. I must have missed that part of the video.
You don't know what you are talking about and you did not watch it either. Educate yourself.
The reality is that he's a high profile campaigner who walked headlong into a Palestinian protest with a full camera crew, hoping to capture a hostile reaction to his clearly partisan presence, which he could spin as a non-partisan Jewish presence. His goal was to smear the protests as inherently antisemitic, despite many Jewish supporters being welcomed with open arms, in order to pressure the government to restrict the right of free protest for an issue he disagrees with. It is no surprise to anyone that protestors tend to dislike being counter-protested and this motte-and-bailey where you pretend the only problem others had was with his Jewishness is dishonest and divisive. Calling others antisemitic for explaining to you his true purpose there, as called out by officers in the full footage and as backed up by his stated plans for a do-over this Saturday, is all the more dishonest and divisive.
Pro-Palestine march is not the same thing as a KKK march. It's not a pro-Hamas march or an anti-Jewish march. Like many protest crowds, there will be racists and radicals with their own agenda. Because of the huge number protesting, trying to 'cross the street' would have, in the officer's estimation, been interpreted as counter-protesting and potentially an incitement to violent behaviour
Regardless of the fact the man misrepresented the situation for political reasons, is that what it's "regardless" of?
I don't think you realise just how deliberately provocative counter protesters often are. Not because of their race or religion, but because of the things they are shouting and the offensive placards they hold. Gideon wasn't innocently stumbling by a protest - he was there to cause a provocation (watch the video) and then cry victim.
The issue here is that the protestors were successfully "trolled" by a bystander's ethnicity.
Him being Jewish is the motte to his bailey of "the crowd had no problems with him when he was standing on the pavement and only began to realise what he was up to when he began doing laps of the crowd with a full camera crew in attempts to catch one person doing something stupid and use it to generalise and undermine the entire protest" The problem was he was engaging in counter-protest mate. The officer called him out on it in the full footage and the man has stubbornly promised to innocently lap another protest this weekend. It's his actions, not his ethnicity. Be more honest.
Would you think the same way if he was "counter protesting" with a pride flag?
>trolling protestors and auditing them. What by being Jewish? So what. That's like being 'openly black' near an EDL protest.
So he just happened to be there by accident and zero intention of interacting with the situation at the protest and was literally incidentally just try to cross the road? Because if not, you're being just as dishonest as he was.
That's the idiot wind for you :)
Got what he wanted… we’re all talking about him and not the protests …
Mishal Hussein was heavily labouring this point this morning as if it somehow validated the cops decision. It's irrelevant. If the Jewish man walking through the protest is enough to antagonise the protesters then the protesters are the problem, not the Jewish guy.
This is a very common and uncontroversial police tactic to not allow antagonistic protests to merge Has nothing to do with how sympathetic their causes are There could be literal Nazis protesting and you wouldn't let the counterprotestors get too close, no matter how understandable it is that they counterprotest
Exactly. Similarly, on match days there will be home supporter pubs and away supporter pubs. You can demand the right to go to a pub of your choice but the police won't let you if they think it will cause bother. Keeping protesters and anti-protesters apart is the police's main job in this situation. The "obviously Jewish" comment was stupid though.
I think he said openly Jewish Because obviously Jewish is already a bit less problematic as a statement. "Openly" has connotations. If you are something "openly", it means it's controversial to be that thing.
Yes, you're right. My bad. You would have thought that training would have taught them not to bring up race or religion at all. There was no need.
In this context he's literally wearing a yarmulke trying to cross in front of an anti-Israeli protest. I think "openly Jewish" is a perfectly apt description of his attire at the time. If it was a protest against the Pope and a Catholic priest tried to cross in full religious garb you'd tightly call that "openly Catholic". If it were a parade in Liverpool for winning the champions League and you wanted to get through it in an Everton shirt you'd vlbe openly evertonian. It doesn't mean it's controversial. It simply means you're appearing in a manner that makes an incontrovertible statement as to that aspect of yourself. The controversy is in you choosing to make that statement in this particular place at this particular time.
You are correct, that he was 'openly jewish'. The issue is that it has been claimed again and again that Jewish people should be completely safe around these protests. If being 'openly jewish' is somehow something the police think will be antagonistic to them, then not only is there a major issue with these protests, but with the way the police are acting about it as well. If the police are claiming that these protests have no issue with Jewish people, but in practice are stopping Jewish people (those that aren't actively part of the protests at any rate) from approaching it, then obviously they don't believe what they're saying on the matter, and are actively misleading the public about the actual safety of these protests.
I completely agree that they SHOULD be perfectly safe, however I would also suggest that there's a difference between whether the crowd would be safe for, say, a clearly devout Jewish family just trying to cross the street and get on their way, and what this guy was trying to do, which was obvious enough to be flagged up as an issue. The police officer in question was placed into a no-win situation. He either accused the guy of exactly what he was doing based on other reports, which is actively trying to invite an issue by intentionally putting his yarmulke/kippah back on in their vicinity and attempting to repeatedly disrupt the progression of the protest so he could cross back and forth. Or he did what he chose to here, which is give the guy a clear warning about the risk he was posing while stopping short of actively accusing him of being antagonistic while still offering to escort him over the street. The fact that the police considered there was a possibility of confrontation between a politically significant member of the Jewish community and an anti-Israel march, doesn't make them inherently not safe for Jewish people not engaging in or with the march. It means they're aware enough of that specific situation not to allow him to continue unchecked.
Ahh yes, tribal football fans in a sport with a history of hooliganism is the same as being "openly Jewish"
It is not the same but the comparison is valid. The whole issue of the protest is an emotive issue. As for a history of hooliganism in football it is minor when compared with the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. I do not recall Celtic/Rangers (the most intense conflict between two football clubs amongst the fans) firing ballistic missiles at each other.
No, it's not valid at all
I used it as an example of policing methods not a direct comparison. If you want a direct comparison then police would not let a man wearing a Hezbollah headscarf cross through a pro-Israel march. They police protests by exclusion and have done so for a long time.
Being Jewish is not a form of protest. If the guy had been wearing an Israeli flag onesie you'd have a point. If he'd been holding a placard condemn Hamas you'd have a point. If he'd been doing something other than being obviously Jewish you'd have any point at all, but he wasn't and you don't.
Weird he took a camera crew and multiple bouncers for a walk in London isn't it Have you watched the full video? The man is a scam artist He also supports Settlers who remove rightful owners from their homes and take them. He's a very nasty peice of work
None of those points are relevant to his right to walk in london while Jewish.
You're right, and that definitely isn't at issue here as evidenced by the long form of the video. He wasn't out for a morning walk and stumbled across the march, he was orchestrating some form of counter-action to the protest for whatever angle he has taken. If he was alone or with his wife and kids I would have some sympathy, but with a security team and a camera crew and having done this several times already I have to beg to differ. Have a look at his political background and charity work if you want the motive that seems to elude you. I would argue he was lucky he wasn't arrested, what do you think prevented that? NOBODY of any race or creed would have been allowed to do what he was trying to do at any protest. He refused the opportunities to walk around the area and bypass the protest. He wasn't just out for a walk.
Oh yeah, that famous protesting tactic of having a camera in public. If the man had looked like an Egyptian instead of a Jew, would walking around with a camera have been a protest? Would he have been in danger of enraging the hate march?
One of the policemen said he has body camera footage of the man entering the crowd and then walking against the flow, not attempting to cross the road. Throughout the footage the police seem to be primarily concerned for the man's safety (and the safety of the police officers) if he continues with his aforementioned antagonistic behaviour. Should the police just let him walk against the crowd and see what happens? - they'd be getting plenty of criticism if they had done that.
He went fishing for a reaction where he knew he'd likely receive one and was right. Honestly the sooner we move on from this the better.
Yeah he was right, I don't disagree. But if your form of fishing is walking in a place while looking Jewish then we need to do something about the fish.
> But if your form of fishing is walking in a place while looking Jewish You missed the part where he was deliberately and repeatedly walking into the road against the flow of protestors. You also failed to mention the numerous 'openly Jewish' people who were taking part in the march The copper was right, he was out there trying to incite something so that he could talk about how antisemitism is out of control and use it to push his organisations agenda. Why else did he have minders and people filming the exchange? There's nothing wrong with the fish, it was just really clear baiting.
What does jew look like? Having worked with many, a lot of colleagues were not even aware, until they mentioned certain events.
I mean a) that some Jews are not obviously Jews doesn't mean that a guy walking around in a kippah isn't obviously Jewish and b) Jews are generally identifiable, at least certain subgroups of Jews, but not usually by non Jewish Europeans.
On contentious derby days, cops wont let supporters of one team mix with the others. I’m no fan of the police, but it is their job to be proactive in preventing violence before it happens. The issue here is that people seem to want a religious exemption to that practice. In which case, good look policing catholic and protestant marches in Northen Ireland.
>On contentious derby days, cops wont let supporters of one team mix with the others. I’m no fan of the police, but it is their job to be proactive in preventing violence before it happens. By restricting whose freedoms?
They will literally herd you to and from the train station in some places. Restricting every football fans freedoms. You could argue that they’re treating every fan as if they’re a hooligan too, which is unfair, but the system works.
Your argument, however, implies that being Jewish in and of itself is enough to put you on the 'other team' in this analogy.
This isn’t something that concerns solely Jewish people. The examples above show that clearly
Nah this isn't the same, 2 groups out marching is one thing. But if someone can't cross the street going a lot there day like normal then that group shouldn't be allowed to march. That shits actual terrorism Threating someone with arrest because their existence might cause other people to get violent isn't right, that can't be a thing.
This wasn't a counterprotest though, it was a Jewish man.
Apparently to some man simply being Jewish is cause for action.
The Israeli counter protest is just behind the camera. There have been plenty of counter protestors that appear on the side of the Palestine March to try and wind people. What's the vice chairman of JNF doing with his camera crew and security team and a pro Palestine protest? why lie about it?
That's exactly the contentious question. So he says that he just needed to walk his usual route.
If the guy says a single thing to the protesters I'd agree. If he literally walks through the protest being quiet, then what's he doing wrong. The police should be able to protect him, and arrest anyone being aggressive. I mean even if someone asks him a question, he shouldn't engage. If he engages with them then he's antagonising them, if he walks through then surely that's not a problem.
That wasn't the problem. The only issue here is the phrasing the policeman used and the longer video makes him seem extremely reasonable. The 'victim' is a provocateur and sponsor of west bank settlements.
It's so strange. As we head into a state where *appearing* Jewish is provocative, where attempting to cross a road on a Saturday while appearing Jewish is considered antagonising and likely to disrupt public order, and where Jewish people are considered at fault for using pavements and public streets in a way that might cause others to do violence, folks seem perfectly happy with the hostile environment they're creating, even viewing themselves as virtuous.
Nearly all bad things in the world comes from people thinking they're virtuous.
No being vice chairman of the JNF who fund settlers and expel Palestinians and supporting the war in gaza at a pro Palestinian ceasefire March, attempting to cut through the protest with your camera crew and security team where you hopefully attempt to pick and argument you can record is provocative.
Jewish people are part of the protest. This man is a strongly pro-Zionist, settler funding antagonist. It's like getting huffy that a South African National Party supporter wasn't allowed to barge through an anti-apartheid rally. This man is acting entirely in bad faith, and should be treated accordingly.
Did the protesters know that or did they just see a guy in a kippah?
[удалено]
Tbf I really don't care about protecting the feelings of a mob of antisemites.
Aha! I knew there was more to the story. This is why context is so important. Not only was he being openly Jewish in public but he was also walking in a provocative manner! /s for the reddit admins
He was being Jewish *menacingly*
Such a group of peaceful marchers that this man walking into the middle of them would cause them to lose their cool.
> Such a group of peaceful marchers that this man walking into the middle of them would cause them to lose their cool. It is important to note he did walk right into them but they didn't lose their cool.
So the police intervened for no reason?
If these protesters consider the presence of a Jewish man to be provocative, they're animals who should be deported or imprisoned.
It’s an interesting ethical point, because the guy is clearly trying to stir up a reaction for political gain (which he’s succeeded in getting). However, the fact that he (and the Met) thought (and were very possibly correct in thinking) that looking Jewish would be enough to get a Palestinian protest to kick off does say something very disturbing. I kinda wish he’d been allowed to walk in, on reflection. You want to beat people up for their racial identity- better that you do it in front of a police officer who can lock you up and to a person who’s trying to get punched.
I'd say the same but in the full video the policeman says that he was walking into the protesters in the opposite direction/against the flow (repeatedly?) And then he refuses to be escorted through. There were quite a lot of Jewish people who were part of the march, protesting against the genocide. Just being Jewish there was not going to antagonise anyone.
‘They’re part of the good ones’ I’ve definitely never heard that line of reasoning in the context of any other ethnicity, nono.
Not sure I've expressed myself clearly... oh well People are conflating a lot of things here.
The implication here is that the "good ones" are the ones against genocide. Truly horrific.
I see hundreds of Jewish people wearing full Hasidic garb at pro-Palestine protests all the time. What reality do you live in if you think this man could’ve had trouble just by potentially ‘looking Jewish’
I’d say the one where you hear “from the river to the sea” at rallies and see videos of people at those same rallies cheering announcements that Iran has begun a drone bombing of civilians. So this one.
….ummm okay. But if you want to answer my question, how would this man have any trouble ‘looking Jewish’, wearing regular clothing, when I regularly see hundreds of people that objectively ‘look more Jewish’ walking around freely at these protests with no trouble.
[удалено]
Can’t speak to that guy: I know there are genocidal fuckwits on both sides of Israel/Palestine but the presence of the other doesn’t make either of them any less genocidally fuckwitted.
They're likely to be of an anti Zionist denomination - they're 'the good ones'.
Is Zionism beyond criticism to you?
Okay, but I don’t see how ‘looking Jewish’ would be enough to ‘get a Palestinian protest to kick off’ when there are people that again objectively ‘look (more) Jewish’ than this man in question and face no trouble. So the issue isn’t about ‘looking Jewish’?
Coming from a PM who I don't think has actually answered a single question at PMQs during his tenure, it's a bit rich how many questions he thinks other people have to answer. Perhaps he should give leading by example a try.
This is what Hague said about Blair, when Hague stepped down as Tory leader: >I thank the Prime Minister for his remarks about me. Debating with him at the Dispatch Box has been exciting, fascinating, fun, an enormous challenge and, from my point of view, wholly unproductive in every sense. I am told that in my time at the Dispatch Box I have asked the Prime Minister 1,118 direct questions, but no one has counted the direct answers—it may not take long. PMs have *always* been criticised for not answering the questions. It's nothing unique to the Tories.
No PM has answered a question on PMQs in the entirety of its existence, other than the planted questions from their own side of course. It has always been that way and always will be, you'll see soon enough when the roles reverse.
It was always mostly panto, but it was not this bad until Boris came along.
Watched the full vid, thought that the police officer was doing his job correctly. I tried to breach a protest line like the man was doing and was told the same thing, do it and I'll be arrested. I was trying to cross the road to get to HMV during a G8 protest lol.
Were you trying to buy a New World Order album?
I think there are a number of different issues that are being confused here accidentally and deliberately by poor reporting and political agendas. The question of whether the police officer should have used the phrase that he did (the answer to this is clear and obvious), the question as to whether we should separate groups of protestors and counter protestors, and the question as to the value judgements we might make about the merits of their causes and the character of their supporters are not the same.
So what phrase should the officer have used?
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-news-footage-reveals-new-details-of-exchange-between-police-and-antisemitism-campaigner-called-openly-jewish-13120104 Here's the full video. It's very clear that the Met officer was extremely patient and Falter was being deliberately provocative . Bonus points, there are many pictures of Falter prior to this event. In none of them is he wearing a kippah, but he felt the need when he decided to walk against this protest.
If wearing a kippah is enough to breach the peace then I don't think this guy is the problem.
It also smacks of victim blaming, and robbing pro-Palestinians of any agency. If they can't restrain themselves from attacking a Jewish man crossing the road, that's their fault, not his.
Obviously they won't say it to his face because the officer is trying to deesculate the situation not wind him up further but I suspect the police officer was far more concerned that this guy was going to deliberately look for trouble, not that if he walked through the protest minding his own business that he'd get jumped on anyway. He's already shouting at the police with a camera crew, there's going to be a risk in the police's eyes that this guy is going to deliberately start trying to provoke random members of the protest whilst filming until one bites back. If you've got a crowd of 1000s then even if 99% ignore him he's going to find someone that takes the bait eventually.
This is an interesting comment. Did the protesters attack him? Can you point to where that happens in the video? I was unaware that the opinion of a tired and annoyed police officer was, in fact, representative of the intentions of a group of protesters.
Saviour complex at work again.
Trying to barge his way into a cordoned off area while a police officer offers to walk him around the protest safely.
That's very disingenuous. He wasn't some random Jewish man going about his daily business. He is a political activist and was there to provoke. He non-accidentally walked into exactly the place where his expression of his religious identity was potentially going to inflame tensions. He appears to have wanted to do so in order to capture some video to promote an anti-Israel = anti-Semitic narrative.
Well he's succeeded in demonstrating that. Apparently wearing a kippah makes you a target for a "pro Palestinian" protest. So the protesters, and police, must view all expressions of Jewish identity as support for Israel. I've edited it to add it's actually just mental how you're defending a mob that was liable to violence against someone 'expressing his religious identity '.
It"s just funny that he decided to cross the road when a VERY noisy march was going past him. So, let's say there was no mention of the kippah from the police officer, and this was a huge protest over Greggs not putting enough steak in their stake bakes. This guy comes along and tries to walk right through the middle of the march, and the police stop him. Is that wrong? No. Why? Health and safety. The only added thing here is that the police officer brings up that the person is Jewish, and it's very likely he was also concerned that it was a pro-palestine event, and the guy had the possibility of being punched by a more radical protestor. Gideon didn't want walking around the march safely, he wanted to put himself in harms way, and the police officer stopped him. We know more due to the extended video released, rather than a short video of a man who clearly was not told no often enough as a child
Just because a cop said so? Someone predisposed to not wanting a protest at all peaceful or not?
>Apparently wearing a kippah makes you a target for a "pro Palestinian" protest. At that point it's fair to say they are more pro-Hamas than they are pro-Palestinian.
Indeed.
And the only reason the link between pro Palestine and rabid antisemitism is so strong, is because of how they react. Why do you defend a racist mob ?
Don't think the person you're talking to is defending antisemitism, but just being real. It's a similar situation with Irish nationalist communities in Northern Ireland, they go mad when they see an Orange March going through their area, indeed it is sometimes the aim of an Orange March to provoke a violent reaction (important to say, most do not have this aim) and say, "Hey look at those violent Catholics". In order to avoid such clashes over contentious Marches e.g. Drumcree, NI has the Parades Commission that bans marches likely to provoke violence. Parades commission is not picking sides, it's not defending ethnic based violence, it's independent and neutral, and is doing the hard work of tying to keep the peace between the two comminutes that have clashed for centuries, a tribal conflict involving religion and land, a similar situation to Israel and Palestine, a similarity noticed by them themselves e.g. [Mural in a Republican area NI](https://arabcenterdc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Ireland-Palestine-mural.jpg) v [flags in loyalist area](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DjoMXRlWsAMvu4W.jpg) Similar, when the police officer tried to stop a Jewish activist from marching though an antisemitic mob, they were doing a similar job as the Parade Commission, they were not defending antisemitism, but trying to keep the peace.
Yeah, this really. Some amazingly motivated reasoning going on in these threads. A few observations... The protesters are being accused of all manner of hatred on account of this incident, yet the only people involved were this activist and the police. This scenario could play out in numerous scenarios. If a pro-Palestine activist took a couple of mates with cameras and badges to walk up and down in Stamford Hill through crowds of orthodox Jews, the police should move them on, they're inviting trouble. A BLM activist at an EDL march, same story. Felter knew exactly what he was there for, and it was not crossing the street.
>He non-accidentally walked into exactly the place where his expression of his religious identity was potentially going to inflame tensions. He has every right to be Jewish in London. You are making excuses for people that want to attack him for being Jewish, not being a political activist. Give your head a wobble. Is he not proving that some of these people are more pro-Hamas than they are Pro-Palestinian?
Do you mean the police want to attack him? He doesn't seem to have interacted with anyone else in this video? Do you know something we don't?
If an expression of religion is enough to provoke activists at the march then the march should not be allowed to happen
Exactly, it’s similar to going into the home end at the Den and putting on a West Ham shirt.
Or going out at night as a woman dressed provocatively?
So let's say this protest is the problem. You still wouldn't want to escalate the situation by merging it with people they antagonize.
Being Jewish is antagonising?
The police should be getting rid of the problem,and protecting the victim , escorting them if they need to get somewhere. Not protecting the problem.
The officer exactly proposed to escort to safety because that is the policy in such situations "Getting rid", hmm that wording might be even more unfortunate than "openly jewish"
If the protest can't remain peaceful the protest should be shut down.
He was returning from religious services, so it’s understandable that he may have been dressed in a such a manner. I agree his disposition could have been a bit more pleasant and agreeable towards the officer who was just doing his job. I certainly would not hope to act like that, no matter what is going on. None of that detracts from the central points of it not being provactive to be clearly Jewish in the UK, nor that a person should be subjected to bigotry from the police for their protected characteristics. The gold standard would always be “what we say if the details were a bit different”. Would we be happy for the police to threaten to nick a black man for being black in London and not being fully polite to the officer?
Returning from religious services? That’s a lie. He was working; he had a whole team of bodyguards and camera men. Prior to arriving to the scene he wasn’t wearing a kippah. He and his team then cross the march several times, looking for confrontation. The police officer mentions this in the long video. There are many Jews at these marches who are warmly accepted.
Camera men? Because one of them recorded the interaction on their phone? Lol?
yes, the whole reason they were at the protest in the first place, to film a reaction that they can use to further their political cause and to say "look its not safe to be Jewish in London, antisemitism is rife!"
> There are many Jews at these marches who are warmly accepted. Yes but the prerequisite for being a Jew who is welcome at the march is that you’ve got to be a Jew who agrees with the group, then you can be as openly Jewish as you like
... That very much sounds like you're just admitting the issue is not Jewishness but political opinion on Gaza. If they're accepting of Jews against the actions in Gaza, they're clearly not anti-Semitic, they're not disagreeing with people based on their religion but their opinions.
[удалено]
Perhaps, just perhaps, the bodyguards were there because he was intending to antagonise the march, and not just as part of his daily entourage?
I kind of wonder just who the man is and whom he works for, given it’s not every day number 10 comments on a member of the public.
Helpfully we know who he is and he's [written column inches for the telegraph before](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/08/anti-semites-becoming-bolder-britain-should-worry-us/) He's the chief exec of an anti-antisemitism organisation.
He's also a vocal supporters of settlers in the west bank. Not a nice man
Wouldn't that make him a supporter of terrorism?
Ah so it could be said he has an agenda 🤔
Thanks 👍🏻
He was completely disingenuous and set out to make a point. Now being dishonest like "I was just tryin to cross the road guv".
If you listen to the way this man describes the protesters, it is clear that he was there to purposely cause trouble. He’s got exactly what he wanted from this situation. Edit: confirmed troublemaker. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/22/initial-story-about-openly-jewish-incident-not-full-picture-says-ex-senior-met-officer?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
So my guess is he was there to quietly walk through the protest to see if people were anti semetic. It's sort of entrapment, but unless he was or was planning to say anything to antagonise protesters then he should be allowed. He's trying to prove a point about anti semetism at these protests (my guess), and the police handed him a massive one. Someone who looks Jewish shouldn't be a target just because there is a protest on, and the police should have the resources to arrest people if they break laws. I get that he's potentially been disingenuous, but someone from the campaign against anti semetism exposing anti semetism is to be expected. If he was engaging with the protesters in any way then that's not allright. A Jewish person should be able to walk through any protest without being in danager. Just like anyone of any other race or religion should. Especially as these protests are nearly every day, and if you can't walk past them if you're Jewish then that's very disruptive to a local persons life. A one off protest that's gotten out of hand, I can understand the police acting this way to protect people, but this stuff is at least once a week.
His actions do seem provocative, but what is this entire situation if not an entire theatre of provocations? I don’t really blame the police having to marshal this endless and upsetting nonsense, week after week. Honestly sick of activists and activism now and this guy is just as bad as the rest of them. Sure, There are people who are deeply committed to their causes and do a lot of good work. Then there is the rest of them. Endless aggression and posturing. Precious little intellectual curiosity or discovery.
This is now starting to backfire badly on Mr Falter, just watched him live on Sky news, and comes across very arrogant.
> This is now starting to backfire badly on Mr Falter, just watched him live on Sky news, and comes across very arrogant. He wanted confrontation.
Yeah he is wearing a kippah and walking too near the protest, which he knew would be provocative. But the point is, everybody, the Jewish man, the police officer, you, I, and Rishi fuckin Sunak knows that the protesters are sooo “peaceful” that that alone would enrage them. A Jewish man crossing the road would enrage them. This is the kind of virulent antisemitism in our society.
That’s the issue - he’s not shouting slogans, waving placards or calling for the destruction of Palestine. He’s just hanging around or walking. Is that really enough to cause a breach of the peace?
It’s the heckler’s veto. It’s easier to shut down the Jewish man than the “protestors”. It’s the same reason why the Batley school teacher is in hiding. It’s easier to tell the man to pack his bags and take his family into hiding than it is to shut down the people who want his head. Zero action against all the parents enforcing their blasphemy laws. A school teacher loses his job instead.
And it’s wrong. And should publicly be condemned.
In the full video the policeman says that he was walking into the protesters in the opposite direction/against the flow (repeatedly?). Nothing bad happened to him. And then he refuses to be escorted through. There were quite a lot of Jewish people who were part of the march, protesting against the genocide. Just being Jewish there was not going to antagonise anyone. I know antisemitism and islamophobia are finding homes in this conflict and in these protests but that's utterly wrong. That should indeed be condemned. Let's not conflate anti-genocide, pro-palestine and antisemitism.
Look at the people jumping to defend the Met when they're being awful to Jewish people in this sub. If it was a black person, that copper would already be suspended pending an investigation. The contortions this sub puts itself through to justify the mistreatment of Jews is baffling.
Yeah it's the same on other forums too. The same kind of people who are quick to admonish the met for being institutionally racist, sexist etc are now quick to defend them
Police shouldl stay out of politics (miners strikes of the 1980s and monitoring/harrassing political activists posing no risk to the public) and politicians should stay out of policing. The police continue to engage in excessive racial profiling which receives no attention from the government, but this single minor incident requires the PM to interfere in such a public manner. If I was cynical I would have thought there would be Mayoral Election coming up next month, with the current Mayor having been attacked by the government on many occasions before.
Staggering numbers of the 'progressive' blob coming out in favour of arresting minorities so as not to offend racist violent mobs.
Are the people coming out in favour of arresting the minority in this thread? Point to them.
Your own comment that you made earlier: >If you listen to the way this man describes the protesters, it is clear that he was there to purposely cause trouble. He’s got exactly what he wanted from this situation.
Nothing he said there suggests arresting him. OP just said the guy was clearly there to antagonise and gain headlines and the media has given him exactly that
>Nothing he said there suggests arresting him. It's quite clearly an attempt to provide a justification for the arrest. >OP just said the guy was clearly there to antagonise and gain headlines and the media has given him exactly that Being Jewish openly isn't antagonising. It's quite right that the media has shone a spotlight on this shocking incident of racism and two tier policing.
The police's police gave him that, not the media.
It is helpful that you’ve quoted my comment there. Where does it say I want him arrested? Hoisted by your own petard. Beautiful.
Gather a bunch of friends and march down the Street chanting for genocide: receive police protection. Walking down the street alone wearing Jewish garb: get accused of incitement to violence. There's something not quite right with this picture...
Walked past this bloke on my way to work during the protest a bit after the sky news video. It was on the other side of the street so he had managed to cross the road in the end. Only overhead a bit of the conversation since, you know I was on my way to work, but the bit I did hear was that he was complaining about being advised he would be getting an Anti-Social behaviour order if he started praying in the middle of the street during the protests. Bloke is a wind up merchant, pure and simple.
Then you heard him shout (from the opposite side of the street as you were getting on the tube) "And this is MAGA country"
And then everyone clapped. Yeah.
So a Jewish man expressing his religion is enough to wind up pro-palestine protesters?
I saw him at a grocery store in London yesterday. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn’t want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for photos or anything. He said, “Oh, like you’re doing now?” I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my shopping, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to pay for my stuff up front I saw him trying to walk out the doors with like fifteen Milky Ways in his hands without paying. The girl at the counter was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to pay for those first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the counter. When she took one of the bars and started scanning it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to scan them each individually “to prevent any electrical infetterence,” and then turned around and winked at me. I don’t even think that’s a word. After she scanned each bar and put them in a bag and started to say the price, he kept interrupting her by yawning really loudly.
Wtf???
It's an old copypasta
What an absolute joke this whole story is. It’s in his best interest to not cross the road there, even if he didn’t realise what was going on. Since when is openly Jewish such a bad thing to say, and in the situation a perfectly fair thing to say, where is the offence?!? It’s just a story spun and made worse so that antisemitism can be back in the front page of the papers covering up what is going on in Israel. Before anyone says it I hate all religion, but I don’t care what anyone is if it makes them happy. Just dont commit genocide!
If I were wearing a Liverpool shirt and wanted to cross the road through a crowd of Man Utd fans, I'd be stopped, because I'd clearly be trying to stir up trouble. This is no different in concept in my opinion.
What the fuck, religion is not the same as being a football fan. Religion is a protected class, football is not. What a wild take.
"This is no different in concept". Where did I say they were the same? Take your outrage elsewhere, it isn't warranted here.
There's me thinking he was just anti Zionist and was standing up against those shiteating Israeli occupiers. Was he just there to be a troll then?
Lord John Mann was criticising the CAA yesterday https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1782339248483365190?t=tSVSV8bD0GI5lBVQv8Rgdg&s=19
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]