|
Israel
Apr 21, 2024 21:04:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 21, 2024 21:04:39 GMT
Qell, IMO , there are two answers to this. 1 If course no one should be at risk walking the streets of the UK or any country or anywhere, particularly if they are minding their own business 2 In the real world, if you put yourself at risk by putting yourself in a situation that someone may take offence at your presence, for whatever reason, there is a liklihood that indeed you may be harmed....perhaps you should not be, but you may be. ( there's a major worldwide incident occuring in hthe MiddleEast in which thousands of innocent people are actually dying, so perhaps people are slightly incensed, not a good background to " mske a political point")) But thirdly and simply , the Policeman was trying to prevent the man from being harmed, irrespective of any wider political implications. Perhaps he should have done nothing. In my opinion I wasn't questioning the motives of the officer. Ok, I suppose he would be at risk because some people who were demonstrating may attack him because he is Jewish..and the " Zionists" who are " attacking" Gaza are Jewish
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 21, 2024 21:48:16 GMT
There is a much longer (15 min or so) video of the entire incident and it puts into context what actually happened. (Unfortunately I can't find it right now). You've got to feel really sorry for the copper, he's got the paitent of a saint and really, he should just have arrested him on the spot. And Falter is now trying to get the copper sacked! Sickening. I agree with your sentiments about the Policeman being in a difficult situation, but I'm not sure he could legally arrest him. If he had done so, I think we would be in a a whole different set of circumstances " Police arrest innocent man for exercising his freedom/ right to walk where he wants" probably a wrongful arrest, perhaps what the Victim wants. I've pondered what I could/would have done and wondered what the public expect the Police to do. Perhaps he could have " discussed" with him all the options and possibly let him walk " through" the demonstration....any public order consequence is possibly the fault of the " Jewish man" ...he may have got injured, killed, caused a riot...but , hey, he has proved his point. Perhaps the Policeman could have used different words...but in this case , in the real situation, does it really matter? Perhaps he could have said " As a Jewish man you are putting yourself at risk by walking near to the demonstration, but if that is what you want to do, so be it". I actually can't see alot wrong with what he said... most people would just ignore it and get on with it. In a public order situation Police are not looking to make arrests, but to preserve the peace and protect life . To arrest someone would take the police officer out of a crowd control situation. It's a long time since I was in the Police but I'd imagine " crowd control/ Police " instruction" to not to do something/ to go in a different direction is part of common law and MOST IMPORTANTLY is simply dependent upon the understanding that the officer is acting in your best interests, on your behalf. When I was in remotely similar situations the last thing on my mind was the politics of it, but then we didn't have cameras , social media.
Have you watched the full (13 min) video BJR?
The senior officer who intervenes, warns the man that if he attempts to step forward again, he will be instantly arrested and consequently, the man doesn't try it again, he is repeatedly offered numerous alternatives to his provocativeness.
As I said, absolute patience of saints.
|
|
|
Israel
Apr 21, 2024 21:52:32 GMT
via mobile
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 21, 2024 21:52:32 GMT
I agree with your sentiments about the Policeman being in a difficult situation, but I'm not sure he could legally arrest him. If he had done so, I think we would be in a a whole different set of circumstances " Police arrest innocent man for exercising his freedom/ right to walk where he wants" probably a wrongful arrest, perhaps what the Victim wants. I've pondered what I could/would have done and wondered what the public expect the Police to do. Perhaps he could have " discussed" with him all the options and possibly let him walk " through" the demonstration....any public order consequence is possibly the fault of the " Jewish man" ...he may have got injured, killed, caused a riot...but , hey, he has proved his point. Perhaps the Policeman could have used different words...but in this case , in the real situation, does it really matter? Perhaps he could have said " As a Jewish man you are putting yourself at risk by walking near to the demonstration, but if that is what you want to do, so be it". I actually can't see alot wrong with what he said... most people would just ignore it and get on with it. In a public order situation Police are not looking to make arrests, but to preserve the peace and protect life . To arrest someone would take the police officer out of a crowd control situation. It's a long time since I was in the Police but I'd imagine " crowd control/ Police " instruction" to not to do something/ to go in a different direction is part of common law and MOST IMPORTANTLY is simply dependent upon the understanding that the officer is acting in your best interests, on your behalf. When I was in remotely similar situations the last thing on my mind was the politics of it, but then we didn't have cameras , social media. I can recall many incidences where the police/ myself even had to make difficult decisions at a young inexperienced age. Once in the middle of Stoke, literally, on the central refuge across what was then the Wheatsheaf ( Wetherspoons ) a young girl ( 16 ?) dropped litter . Me " pick it up" " No" ...laughing , thinking it was funny.. Eventually she did, I could presumably reported her....if she refused to give her name address, we are in a new ball game. Obviously some on the Oatcake will be saying it is obvious what you should do....but they have not had to deal with the public on a daily basis. I could literally give loads of examples...I once went to a car waiting ( for a few seconds) on double yellow lines to pick his wife up outside Spodes. Using my discretion ( and seeing his wife approaching) I warned him and did no more. A man ran across the road, asked me what I had done and said " Right , I'm ringing radio Stoke to tell them that the Police have said it is OK to park on double yellow lines". I remember this because it was on my first day as a Policeman There was a man who used to ring Stoke police station every week to admit to any offence that he had heard reported. He hadn't done them, but he had got a criminal record. Do you investigate every one? Unlikely an offence of wasting police time would carry. Another very very wealthy man ( a heir to one of the major potbanks) used to ring the Police ( weekly) to report that he had been robbed...he simply couldn't find something in the house( I went round once , to find his missing Lp ( vinyl ' musical recording!!) on the turntable.Even at the time we knew he had some sort of dementia, but he was also regarded as eccentric...he always came to the door in a dressing gown or full suit and tie, but always with a glass of Whisky in his hand. He blamed the thefts on a " Polish family " who lived down the road. Several times people would ring up to report a youngster missing at 6.00pm...." please get 20 officers ( who don't exist) out to look for her....9.00 pm..." she's turned up now, at a friend's we didn't know about".....if the Police did nothing , they would be criticised. Extea officers could be brought on on overtime, but the cost would be incredible, given the amount of people reported missing Controversially for some on here, a past friend in London, not the Met, had a reliable report of someone ( two actually) people carrying a weapon in a particular area. Do the Police stop and search everyone meeting the description in that area, do nothing or just increase the presence in the area? Whatever they do someone could argue thst something different should have been done. ( I would also add there have been untrue descriptios offfered so that some people would get stopped and searched....so that they could have some fun with the Police and claim they are being victimised when no weapons ate found. To watch every word that you say, when trying to do your best, must be difficult for today's officers.
Have you watched the full (13 min) video BJR?
The senior officer who intervenes, warns the man that if he attempts to step forward again, he will be instantly arrested and consequently, the man doesn't try it again, he is repeatedly offered numerous alternatives to his provocativeness.
As I said, absolute patience of saints.
No I haven't Paul. Perhaps the officer should have done nothing. Presumably that would have made his life easier
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 21, 2024 21:57:46 GMT
I agree with your sentiments about the Policeman being in a difficult situation, but I'm not sure he could legally arrest him. If he had done so, I think we would be in a a whole different set of circumstances " Police arrest innocent man for exercising his freedom/ right to walk where he wants" probably a wrongful arrest, perhaps what the Victim wants. I've pondered what I could/would have done and wondered what the public expect the Police to do. Perhaps he could have " discussed" with him all the options and possibly let him walk " through" the demonstration....any public order consequence is possibly the fault of the " Jewish man" ...he may have got injured, killed, caused a riot...but , hey, he has proved his point. Perhaps the Policeman could have used different words...but in this case , in the real situation, does it really matter? Perhaps he could have said " As a Jewish man you are putting yourself at risk by walking near to the demonstration, but if that is what you want to do, so be it". I actually can't see alot wrong with what he said... most people would just ignore it and get on with it. In a public order situation Police are not looking to make arrests, but to preserve the peace and protect life . To arrest someone would take the police officer out of a crowd control situation. It's a long time since I was in the Police but I'd imagine " crowd control/ Police " instruction" to not to do something/ to go in a different direction is part of common law and MOST IMPORTANTLY is simply dependent upon the understanding that the officer is acting in your best interests, on your behalf. When I was in remotely similar situations the last thing on my mind was the politics of it, but then we didn't have cameras , social media. I can recall many incidences where the police/ myself even had to make difficult decisions at a young inexperienced age. Once in the middle of Stoke, literally, on the central refuge across what was then the Wheatsheaf ( Wetherspoons ) a young girl ( 16 ?) dropped litter . Me " pick it up" " No" ...laughing , thinking it was funny.. Eventually she did, I could presumably reported her....if she refused to give her name address, we are in a new ball game. Obviously some on the Oatcake will be saying it is obvious what you should do....but they have not had to deal with the public on a daily basis. I could literally give loads of examples...I once went to a car waiting ( for a few seconds) on double yellow lines to pick his wife up outside Spodes. Using my discretion ( and seeing his wife approaching) I warned him and did no more. A man ran across the road, asked me what I had done and said " Right , I'm ringing radio Stoke to tell them that the Police have said it is OK to park on double yellow lines". I remember this because it was on my first day as a Policeman There was a man who used to ring Stoke police station every week to admit to any offence that he had heard reported. He hadn't done them, but he had got a criminal record. Do you investigate every one? Unlikely an offence of wasting police time would carry. Another very very wealthy man ( a heir to one of the major potbanks) used to ring the Police ( weekly) to report that he had been robbed...he simply couldn't find something in the house( I went round once , to find his missing Lp ( vinyl ' musical recording!!) on the turntable.Even at the time we knew he had some sort of dementia, but he was also regarded as eccentric...he always came to the door in a dressing gown or full suit and tie, but always with a glass of Whisky in his hand. He blamed the thefts on a " Polish family " who lived down the road. Several times people would ring up to report a youngster missing at 6.00pm...." please get 20 officers ( who don't exist) out to look for her....9.00 pm..." she's turned up now, at a friend's we didn't know about".....if the Police did nothing , they would be criticised. Extea officers could be brought on on overtime, but the cost would be incredible, given the amount of people reported missing Controversially for some on here, a past friend in London, not the Met, had a reliable report of someone ( two actually) people carrying a weapon in a particular area. Do the Police stop and search everyone meeting the description in that area, do nothing or just increase the presence in the area? Whatever they do someone could argue thst something different should have been done. ( I would also add there have been untrue descriptios offfered so that some people would get stopped and searched....so that they could have some fun with the Police and claim they are being victimised when no weapons ate found. To watch every word that you say, when trying to do your best, must be difficult for today's officers. The question is, why would a Jewish man be at risk walking alongside this demonstration?
Is it a question of just the man being at risk?
He has turned up with his own personal bodyguards and the police have closely watched his behaviour before intervening. They are clearly trying to prevent the possibility of public disorder. If an Arab cleric had turned up with his own security at a pro Israel march and seemed intent on trying to start a confrontation, then surely we would all want the police to act in the same way.
And the worst thing about it all, is that Falter and the Campaign for Antisemitism are now trying to get the copper sacked.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 21, 2024 21:59:37 GMT
Have you watched the full (13 min) video BJR?
The senior officer who intervenes, warns the man that if he attempts to step forward again, he will be instantly arrested and consequently, the man doesn't try it again, he is repeatedly offered numerous alternatives to his provocativeness.
As I said, absolute patience of saints.
No I haven't Paul. Perhaps the officer should have done nothing. Presumably that would have made his life easier
Personally, I think the officer behaved impeccably and the full video shows the actual context of the situation.
|
|
|
Israel
Apr 21, 2024 22:28:29 GMT
Post by wannabee on Apr 21, 2024 22:28:29 GMT
It's disgusting to see the same individuals week after week attend Palestine marches only with the intention to incite trouble and then subsequently creating a victimised twitter storm after too. Here's a new one from this weekend who was walking against a protest to try and get a reaction and cause trouble. Now it's suddenly "identifiable jewish man stopped from crossing the road" There is a much longer (15 min or so) video of the entire incident and it puts into context what actually happened. (Unfortunately I can't find it right now). You've got to feel really sorry for the copper, he's got the patience of a saint and really, he should just have arrested him on the spot. And Falter is now trying to get the copper sacked! Sickening. EDIT: Found it ... news.sky.com/story/sky-news-footage-reveals-new-details-of-exchange-between-police-and-antisemitism-campaigner-called-openly-jewish-13120104Are you actually allowed to use the word context when you post videoe clips?
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Apr 21, 2024 22:52:01 GMT
I agree with your sentiments about the Policeman being in a difficult situation, but I'm not sure he could legally arrest him. If he had done so, I think we would be in a a whole different set of circumstances " Police arrest innocent man for exercising his freedom/ right to walk where he wants" probably a wrongful arrest, perhaps what the Victim wants. I've pondered what I could/would have done and wondered what the public expect the Police to do. Perhaps he could have " discussed" with him all the options and possibly let him walk " through" the demonstration....any public order consequence is possibly the fault of the " Jewish man" ...he may have got injured, killed, caused a riot...but , hey, he has proved his point. Perhaps the Policeman could have used different words...but in this case , in the real situation, does it really matter? Perhaps he could have said " As a Jewish man you are putting yourself at risk by walking near to the demonstration, but if that is what you want to do, so be it". I actually can't see alot wrong with what he said... most people would just ignore it and get on with it. In a public order situation Police are not looking to make arrests, but to preserve the peace and protect life . To arrest someone would take the police officer out of a crowd control situation. It's a long time since I was in the Police but I'd imagine " crowd control/ Police " instruction" to not to do something/ to go in a different direction is part of common law and MOST IMPORTANTLY is simply dependent upon the understanding that the officer is acting in your best interests, on your behalf. When I was in remotely similar situations the last thing on my mind was the politics of it, but then we didn't have cameras , social media. I can recall many incidences where the police/ myself even had to make difficult decisions at a young inexperienced age. Once in the middle of Stoke, literally, on the central refuge across what was then the Wheatsheaf ( Wetherspoons ) a young girl ( 16 ?) dropped litter . Me " pick it up" " No" ...laughing , thinking it was funny.. Eventually she did, I could presumably reported her....if she refused to give her name address, we are in a new ball game. Obviously some on the Oatcake will be saying it is obvious what you should do....but they have not had to deal with the public on a daily basis. I could literally give loads of examples...I once went to a car waiting ( for a few seconds) on double yellow lines to pick his wife up outside Spodes. Using my discretion ( and seeing his wife approaching) I warned him and did no more. A man ran across the road, asked me what I had done and said " Right , I'm ringing radio Stoke to tell them that the Police have said it is OK to park on double yellow lines". I remember this because it was on my first day as a Policeman There was a man who used to ring Stoke police station every week to admit to any offence that he had heard reported. He hadn't done them, but he had got a criminal record. Do you investigate every one? Unlikely an offence of wasting police time would carry. Another very very wealthy man ( a heir to one of the major potbanks) used to ring the Police ( weekly) to report that he had been robbed...he simply couldn't find something in the house( I went round once , to find his missing Lp ( vinyl ' musical recording!!) on the turntable.Even at the time we knew he had some sort of dementia, but he was also regarded as eccentric...he always came to the door in a dressing gown or full suit and tie, but always with a glass of Whisky in his hand. He blamed the thefts on a " Polish family " who lived down the road. Several times people would ring up to report a youngster missing at 6.00pm...." please get 20 officers ( who don't exist) out to look for her....9.00 pm..." she's turned up now, at a friend's we didn't know about".....if the Police did nothing , they would be criticised. Extea officers could be brought on on overtime, but the cost would be incredible, given the amount of people reported missing Controversially for some on here, a past friend in London, not the Met, had a reliable report of someone ( two actually) people carrying a weapon in a particular area. Do the Police stop and search everyone meeting the description in that area, do nothing or just increase the presence in the area? Whatever they do someone could argue thst something different should have been done. ( I would also add there have been untrue descriptios offfered so that some people would get stopped and searched....so that they could have some fun with the Police and claim they are being victimised when no weapons ate found. To watch every word that you say, when trying to do your best, must be difficult for today's officers. The question is, why would a Jewish man be at risk walking alongside this demonstration? For the same reason the police are legally allowed to kettle protesters or football supporters to prevent or deal with a potential breach of the peace, violence or threatened violence Gideon Falter was prevented from entering a "Kettled" Protest the same as if a West Brom Supporter would be if they were foolish enough to try and enter a crowd of Kettled Stoke Supporters being escorted to the Train Station The likelihood is that 99% of the time Gideon like the proverbial Chicken would have crossed the road peacefully to the other side. Im guessing that the Police Officer gauged that Gideon's intent was not just to cross the road peacefully but to provoke a reaction and he was legally obliged to prevent that.
|
|
|
Israel
Apr 22, 2024 0:11:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 22, 2024 0:11:27 GMT
Absolutely terrifying ...
|
|
|
Israel
Apr 22, 2024 6:21:00 GMT
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 22, 2024 6:21:00 GMT
I agree with your sentiments about the Policeman being in a difficult situation, but I'm not sure he could legally arrest him. If he had done so, I think we would be in a a whole different set of circumstances " Police arrest innocent man for exercising his freedom/ right to walk where he wants" probably a wrongful arrest, perhaps what the Victim wants. I've pondered what I could/would have done and wondered what the public expect the Police to do. Perhaps he could have " discussed" with him all the options and possibly let him walk " through" the demonstration....any public order consequence is possibly the fault of the " Jewish man" ...he may have got injured, killed, caused a riot...but , hey, he has proved his point. Perhaps the Policeman could have used different words...but in this case , in the real situation, does it really matter? Perhaps he could have said " As a Jewish man you are putting yourself at risk by walking near to the demonstration, but if that is what you want to do, so be it". I actually can't see alot wrong with what he said... most people would just ignore it and get on with it. In a public order situation Police are not looking to make arrests, but to preserve the peace and protect life . To arrest someone would take the police officer out of a crowd control situation. It's a long time since I was in the Police but I'd imagine " crowd control/ Police " instruction" to not to do something/ to go in a different direction is part of common law and MOST IMPORTANTLY is simply dependent upon the understanding that the officer is acting in your best interests, on your behalf. When I was in remotely similar situations the last thing on my mind was the politics of it, but then we didn't have cameras , social media. Have you watched the full (13 min) video BJR? The senior officer who intervenes, warns the man that if he attempts to step forward again, he will be instantly arrested and consequently, the man doesn't try it again, he is repeatedly offered numerous alternatives to his provocativeness.
As I said, absolute patience of saints.
|
|
|
Israel
Apr 22, 2024 6:21:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by mrnovember on Apr 22, 2024 6:21:10 GMT
The question is, why would a Jewish man be at risk walking alongside this demonstration? For the same reason the police are legally allowed to kettle protesters or football supporters to prevent or deal with a potential breach of the peace, violence or threatened violence Gideon Falter was prevented from entering a "Kettled" Protest the same as if a West Brom Supporter would be if they were foolish enough to try and enter a crowd of Kettled Stoke Supporters being escorted to the Train Station The likelihood is that 99% of the time Gideon like the proverbial Chicken would have crossed the road peacefully to the other side. Im guessing that the Police Officer gauged that Gideon's intent was not just to cross the road peacefully but to provoke a reaction and he was legally obliged to prevent that. I didn't question the legality or the rationale of the coppers actions.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Apr 22, 2024 6:58:02 GMT
No I haven't Paul. Perhaps the officer should have done nothing. Presumably that would have made his life easier Personally, I think the officer behaved impeccably and the full video shows the actual context of the situation.
Anyone that thinks this is unacceptable behaviour should go to a few football away games to see what is counted as provocative. In those circumstances the police are simply preventing the risk of wider disorder. The anti monarchist lobby at the Coronation etc. The story seems to be more about him being a Jew any other allegiance and its a non-story.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 22, 2024 6:59:28 GMT
Full video.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 22, 2024 7:02:56 GMT
Pretty obvious what his intentions were.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Apr 22, 2024 7:25:08 GMT
Pretty obvious what his intentions were. It's being portrayed by Sunak as one fella trying to cross the road. It's not a coincidence that a group of others were with him at the same time all gathered and filming wearing a Kippa. The officer has the patience of a saint, he would have arrested you or I after about five minutes and moved us away. The officer knew he was about to become a mini celebrity judging by the number of camera phones and acted with incredible restraint for which he should be commended.
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Apr 22, 2024 7:52:43 GMT
Poor copper. Did nothing wrong. Offered him several alternatives etc..
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Apr 22, 2024 8:48:12 GMT
For the same reason the police are legally allowed to kettle protesters or football supporters to prevent or deal with a potential breach of the peace, violence or threatened violence Gideon Falter was prevented from entering a "Kettled" Protest the same as if a West Brom Supporter would be if they were foolish enough to try and enter a crowd of Kettled Stoke Supporters being escorted to the Train Station The likelihood is that 99% of the time Gideon like the proverbial Chicken would have crossed the road peacefully to the other side. Im guessing that the Police Officer gauged that Gideon's intent was not just to cross the road peacefully but to provoke a reaction and he was legally obliged to prevent that. I didn't question the legality or the rationale of the coppers actions. I never said you did You asked the question " The question is, why would a Jewish man be at risk walking alongside this demonstration?"I gave my opinion why the Police Officer acted the way he did, to eliminate any potential there could be a breach of the peace i.e. the risk factor you inquired about As a point of clarification Gideon Falter wasn't "walking alongside the demonstration" but was attempting to enter the middle of it which was why the Police Officer prevented him entering a kettled demonstration In my opinion Gideon Falter was at no risk even if the Officer allowed him to enter the middle of the Demonstration not least because he was accompanied by his Personal Security and his Fim Crew.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 22, 2024 9:52:56 GMT
Poor copper. Did nothing wrong. Offered him several alternatives etc.. And now Braverman, Bowdon and Sunak are wading in, the poor fella handled it like a model cop and then some, and he now finds himself the brunt of such completely unfair criticism. What's to stop them actually watching the full video rather than just accepting the CAA narrative at face value? It absolutely stinks ... The Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) and former home secretary Suella Braverman called for the Commissioner to resign or be sacked, accusing him of having “emboldened” antisemites. A government source on Sunday said Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is "appalled" at the incident. Other figures including Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden were highly critical of the Met but stopped short of saying Sir Mark should go. Mr Dowden told The Sunday Telegraph that the force had been “disrespecting” Jews while Lord Walney, the Government’s adviser on political violence, accused the Met of displaying “institutional antisemitism”. EDIT: Just seen this : Absolutely staggering arrogance from Braverman ... "the police chose a side" "I don't need to watch the full video".
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 22, 2024 10:39:23 GMT
Poor copper. Did nothing wrong. Offered him several alternatives etc.. And now Braverman, Bowdon and Sunak are wading in, the poor fella handled it like a model cop and then some, and he now finds himself the brunt of such completely unfair criticism. What's to stop them actually watching the full video rather than just accepting the CAA narrative at face value? It absolutely stinks ... The Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) and former home secretary Suella Braverman called for the Commissioner to resign or be sacked, accusing him of having “emboldened” antisemites. A government source on Sunday said Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is "appalled" at the incident. Other figures including Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden were highly critical of the Met but stopped short of saying Sir Mark should go. Mr Dowden told The Sunday Telegraph that the force had been “disrespecting” Jews while Lord Walney, the Government’s adviser on political violence, accused the Met of displaying “institutional antisemitism”. The US and Jews run the UK don't they. That pretty much answers why this poor copper is going to get sacked and his future ruined. Edit. I imagine Sunak has seen the video, but he's a politician and they have no ethics and only care about themselves.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 22, 2024 10:44:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Apr 22, 2024 10:50:38 GMT
Pretty obvious what his intentions were. Similar tactics have been used by oppositions in Northern Ireland in the past. This clip from last year doesn't show the full incident but basically there's a man in a GAA top who repeatedly kept crossing a road and purposely bumping into marchers to try and instigate a fight and succeeded. It's exactly the same tactics being used to try and incite trouble and play the victim just like the person in above clip tried to do.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 22, 2024 10:56:06 GMT
More staggering arrogance on display, this time from from Falter himself. When he's presented with actual facts, he spits his dummy out ...
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Apr 22, 2024 11:09:04 GMT
More staggering arrogance on display, this time from from Falter himself. When he's presented with actual facts, he spits his dummy out ... Whys he not wearing his Kippah today? I guess being "an identifiable jewish man" has no use to him unless he's trying to incite trouble and create a false narrative.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Apr 22, 2024 11:15:21 GMT
Zionist troublemakers coming to a town near you.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 22, 2024 11:17:21 GMT
Superbly articulated ...
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Apr 22, 2024 14:18:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 22, 2024 14:40:25 GMT
Former Met Police Chief Superintendent says that Falter should have been arrested ...
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 22, 2024 14:51:55 GMT
|
|
|
Israel
Apr 22, 2024 18:05:53 GMT
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 22, 2024 18:05:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Apr 22, 2024 20:04:09 GMT
The bloke is a complete arsehole. He set out to cause trouble and, in my opinion. the police acted admirably. Falter is a typical Zionist who has set out to conflate anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism. I'd have locked the bastard up and thrown away the key.
OS.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 22, 2024 20:37:51 GMT
|
|