• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Wow, UK has lost freedom of speech

Here is the Met's response:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1979888634061873477

We understand the concerns raised, but the claim this man was arrested for wearing a star of David necklace is not true. He was arrested for allegedly repeatedly breaching Public Order Act conditions that were in place to keep opposing protest groups apart.

The conditions required protesters from the pro-Israel group Stop the Hate to remain in one area with protesters from the pro-Palestinian group IJAN required to remain in a separate area.

The man told officers he was acting as an independent legal observer but his actions are alleged to have breached the conditions in place, and to have gone beyond observing in an independent and neutral way to provoking and, as such, actively participating as a protester.

Over the course of an hour, the man is alleged to have continuously approached the area allocated to IJAN, getting very close to protesters to film them and provoking a reaction. Officers had to intervene at least four times to ask the man to return to the Stop the Hate area as required by the conditions.

When he failed to do so after multiple warnings, he was arrested.
 
Carrot Flower King said:
Matthew, are you telling me that how this story was initially presented ("framed" if you will) was not totally an accurate version of events?

I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!

Where's my fainting chaise longue?
Click to expand...
So The Jerusulam Post and The Telegraph did yet another piss poor job of journalism, omitting the important part of the event and focusing on a detail out of context.

Two for two for suck-ass reporting in this very thread.
 
Hercules56 said:
Part of why he was arrested was the presence of the Star of David. Police have made that clear. The Star itself was not the criminal act, but wearing the star while trying to antagonize the protestors was part of the context for the arrest.
Click to expand...
Did you know you could be arrested "for" wearing a Manchester United shirt?!
Thermal said:
As a Murcan, I have the Telegraph mentally in the 'don't bother reading' category. I value the BBC and Guardian for their credibility, and try to use them whenever possible, despite their pretty open left lean. A leaning doesn't make their reporting unreliable, and they stand strong to fact checks and sourcing.
Click to expand...
I've found the BBC is good for retractions and corrections, which gains it additional credibility in my eyes.
 
Matthew Best said:
Here is the Met's response:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1979888634061873477

We understand the concerns raised, but the claim this man was arrested for wearing a star of David necklace is not true. He was arrested for allegedly repeatedly breaching Public Order Act conditions that were in place to keep opposing protest groups apart.

The conditions required protesters from the pro-Israel group Stop the Hate to remain in one area with protesters from the pro-Palestinian group IJAN required to remain in a separate area.

The man told officers he was acting as an independent legal observer but his actions are alleged to have breached the conditions in place, and to have gone beyond observing in an independent and neutral way to provoking and, as such, actively participating as a protester.

Over the course of an hour, the man is alleged to have continuously approached the area allocated to IJAN, getting very close to protesters to film them and provoking a reaction. Officers had to intervene at least four times to ask the man to return to the Stop the Hate area as required by the conditions.

When he failed to do so after multiple warnings, he was arrested.
Click to expand...
Of course there is the issue of the too broad powers the police now have to police and control protests but in this instance it seems a reasonable compromise to allow protestors with ...er... different perspectives on current events to co-exist.
 
Carrot Flower King said:
Matthew, are you telling me that how this story was initially presented ("framed" if you will) was not totally an accurate version of events?

I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!

Where's my fainting chaise longue?
Click to expand...
I always bring my fainting couch with me; life is such a shocking affair, i find. If you let me know in advance next time you think you might feel faint, I'll lend it you. You can have some of my smelling salts as well.
 
Thermal said:
The police indicated that such a thing at such a place and time could antagonize others, and the guy was being heavily disingenuous to act like he had no idea that it would do just that.

Eta: yet it was explicitly not the reason for his arrest.
Click to expand...
Free societies don't care if some bigoted ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ is offended by the sight of, God forbid, a Star of David.
 
Hercules56 said:
Free societies don't care if some bigoted ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ is offended by the sight of, God forbid, a Star of David.
Click to expand...
Ok. And?

This guy was arrested for faking to be an independent legal observer, so he could get close access to the opposing side, when he was really a protestor and was wearing his 'colors' in full view to provoke a reaction.
 
Thermal said:
Ok. And?

This guy was arrested for faking to be an independent legal observer, so he could get close access to the opposing side, when he was really a protestor and was wearing his 'colors' in full view to provoke a reaction.
Click to expand...
Pathetic that anti-Semitic protestors are offended and provoked by an ancient symbol of the Jewish People.

Luckily the good police of UKia have their back.
 
Steve said:
You just keep that pitbull-like grip on the 'symbol' bs even in the face of evidence that it was not relevant to the arrest. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
If it was completely irrelevant to the arrest why did the cop bring it up multiple times? Clearly it was relevant.
 
Hercules56 said:
If it was completely irrelevant to the arrest why did the cop bring it up multiple times? Clearly it was relevant.
Click to expand...
He brought it up for like 5 minutes total of an hour long interview, and he seemed to be saying "dude... you said you were an impartial legal observer and there you were displaying one side of the protests symbol while approaching the adversary. Can't you see that it was provoking a fight, when you agreed to be a neutral observer?"

Actually we could ask you the same question.
 
Hercules56 said:
If it was completely irrelevant to the arrest why did the cop bring it up multiple times? Clearly it was relevant.
Click to expand...
Ah, so the detailed Metropolitan Police description of the arrest was a bald-faced lie, but you with your remarkable skills of deduction saw right through that!

Or is it that once a single police officer said a thing that thing remains as the sole and absolute truth and is never subject to change, and anything contradictory is a lie?
 
Thermal said:
He brought it up for like 5 minutes total of an hour long interview, and he seemed to be saying "dude... you said you were an impartial legal observer and there you were displaying one side of the protests symbol while approaching the adversary. Can't you see that it was provoking a fight, when you agreed to be a neutral observer?"

Actually we could ask you the same question.
Click to expand...
Wearing a Magen David is not provoking a fight.

Such a concept is pretty bigoted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom