Bkk Brian

3 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

That still wouldn't make "being Jewish" the reason for the arrest.

If I punched you I would be arrested for assault. If I had not punched you I would not be arrested. The is no arrestable offense without that punch.

There is no arrestable offense without him being Jewish first. 

2 minutes ago, TheFatOne said:

 

They shouldn't have.

They did the right thing.

Probably political.

 

Maybe you should read the apology

2 minutes ago, TheFatOne said:

 

Which is true. These officers did their job.

Pretty much a non-event in terms of news.

More conservative nonsense to try and make Israeli lobbyists/provocateurs look like the victims.

Laughable.

And the source... The source! 😄

The officers apologized for their errors.

2 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

No.  The only legal way is "to prevent a breach of the peace".  That's the legal part.

 

 

 

The rest, whilst being somewhat relevant, doesn't constitute the reason for the arrest.  There is no illegality being suggested about "being Jewish".

In the court room a judge will ask what caused the breach of peace. It is 100% relevant.

2 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

Either way, that wasn't what he was threatened with arrest for.  It was to prevent a breach of the peace.

Legally there is only one way with the cause being ""quite openly Jewish," that's why I prefer the whole sentence rather than some people snipping it out of context:

"Officers informed him that his presence, being "quite openly Jewish," could potentially lead to a "breach of peace" amidst the pro-Palestinian march. One officer went as far as to assert that Falter's mere existence was "antagonising" the demonstrators."

3 minutes ago, Jeff the Chef said:

 

Yeah, yeah, yeah this is about should UNRWA be shut-down not what happened on the 7/10.

The one and only reason Israel wants rid of UNRWA is the "right of return" which is in their charter through the UN, anything else is waffle and propaganda by Israel.

About UNRWA AND Oct 7th, from the OP:

"October 7 has highlighted some of these concerns with Israel’s specific allegations that staff members were involved in acts of terrorism."

Calls for Met chief to go over threat to arrest ‘openly Jewish’ CAA head

Other senior conservatives criticised the Met’s handling of the incident with Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden telling the Telegraph that it was “hard to think of any other minority that would be treated as disrespectfully as Jews seem to be”.

Gary Mond, chair of the National Jewish Assembly, was quoted by the paper as saying, “The buck stops at the top and if Rowley is not prepared to properly police the demonstrations, he has to go and be replaced by someone who can.”

In an apology on Friday, the Met’s Assistant Commissioner Matt Twist said the words “openly Jewish” had been “hugely regrettable” and “a poor choice of words”.

https://www.thejc.com/news/calls-for-met-chief-to-go-over-threat-to-arrest-openly-jewish-caa-head-twd1h3gn

Just now, BangkokReady said:

 

I'm not taking anything out of context, and you're being more argumentative than I am.

 

People are making the claim that the man was threatened with arrest for being Jewish.  He wasn't.  That's it.

"quite openly Jewish" actually

"Officers informed him that his presence, being "quite openly Jewish," could potentially lead to a "breach of peace" amidst the pro-Palestinian march. One officer went as far as to assert that Falter's mere existence was "antagonising" the demonstrators."

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

 

Let me explain.  If you punched someone, you would be arrested for punching them.

 

If you were arrested to prevent a breach of the peace, you would be arrested to prevent a breach of the peace.  If the breach of the peace in question was likely to be caused by a Jewish person walking in front of a group of protestors, it still would not be a case of the person being arrested for being Jewish.

 

 

But you're still not being arrested for being Jewish.

 

 

It doesn't.  At least not to me... 🙄

Instead of being argumentative and taking it out of context why not stick to the topic:

"Officers informed him that his presence, being "quite openly Jewish," could potentially lead to a "breach of peace" amidst the pro-Palestinian march. One officer went as far as to assert that Falter's mere existence was "antagonising" the demonstrators."

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

 

Why?  That is what happened!  "I will arrest you to prevent a breach of the peace" is very different from "I will arrest you for being Jewish".

Cause..................

Ok, let me make this a little simpler for you. If I was to punch someone and hurt them I would be arrested for assault. The arrest of assault would not have happened had I not punched anyone. The punch was the cause.

If I was to be openly Jewish and as a result antagonize a group of protestors the police would arrest me for breach of the peace. If I had not been openly Jewish I would not have been arrested as it would not antagonized the protestors, as there was no cause for them to be antagonized. 

I cant believe this needs explaining 

3 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

That doesn't mean he was threatened with arrest for being Jewish.  It's as simple as that.

 

 

Clearly, I am not.

 It's as simple as that.

LOL no, its really not

2 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

Exactly, which means he wasn't threatened with arrest for being Jewish.  I'm a little confused as you appear to say that you don't agree, then go on to say that you do... 🤔

I asked you what was the cause, the cause being he was openly Jew, no cause no arrest. 

You are easily confused. But don't worry they have a Jew pen ready for him next time:

Just now, BangkokReady said:

 

So you agree that he was threatened with arrest to prevent a breach of the peace and not for "being Jewish"?

I was asking you and no I do not agree, if you watch the video the reason is that his presence being "openly Jew" could antagonize the Pro Palestinian march and that would be the reason for a breach of the peace.

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

 

To prevent a breach of the peace.

Ok, so when charged what would have been the cause of the breach of the peace. There must be something that he is doing that causes it, what is that?

3 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

I'm not sure what this has to do with someone being threatened with arrest to prevent a breach of the peace and not because of being Jewish.  🤷‍♂️

What was the reason for the threat of arrest for breach of the peace?

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And Jews are taking part in these demonstrations.

 

So perhaps you have not worked it out.

Tell that to the majority of Jews that do not and for very good reasons

Source

Just now, impulse said:

 

You're making it about Jews and Palestinian protestors.  But it's really about any adversarial entities. 

You need to read the OP before telling me what this is about.

Pro-Palestinian protests ‘making London no-go zone for Jews’
Counter-extremism tsar Robin Simcox warns of ‘permissive environment for radicalisation’ developing in UK

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/03/07/pro-palestinian-protests-london-no-go-zone-jews/

https://archive.ph/RtodA

1 minute ago, impulse said:

 

Smack dab in the middle of a "Free Palestine" protest?  Yes, it is too dangerous.   But I think London's a big enough place to avoid that area.

 

And let's leave out Jews and Palestinians for a moment.

 

I wonder if you'd defend a guy wearing a MAGA hat to a drag queen story hour, a transgender protest, or an abortion rights protest?

I'd acknowledge his right to be there, but still support the cops for arresting him, for his own safety.  It's not as if they're picking on Jews.  Just people who need to be protected from their own stupidity.

 

No lets not deflect into MAGA and drag queens lets stay on topic. That you have admitted London is too dangerous for Jews especially if they happen to be near a Pro Palestinian march which happen to change venues every week and have been ongoing for 6 months.

5 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

He was threatened with arrest to protect him from an angry crowd.  In an ideal world, they'd have enough police there to escort him and even arrest the entire crowd if they threatened him.  But this is real life.

 

He had every right to be there.  But there weren't enough cops, and they may have saved his life.   The only thing I'd fault is the language that may have been used.   But emotions run high and cops are human.

 

So London is too dangerous for Jews at the weekends is what your saying

2 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

No, they are coming from Israel and UN. Obviously those sources are unknown to you. Go on sleeping

No you are wrong again sorry. Its ok you can correct that if you wish by starting at the beginning:

Hamas admits one-third of its data on Gazan deaths is ‘incomplete’

https://aseannow.com/topic/1325030-hamas-admits-one-third-of-its-data-on-gazan-deaths-is-‘incomplete’/

1 minute ago, newbee2022 said:

Hahaha, you and your post are really a joke 🥳🥳🥳

The numbers come from Hamas health authority in Gaza. Yes they are a joke 

I see this is not finished yet.

UK minister writes to London police after officer implies Jewish man’s kippa ‘provoked’ anti-Israel crowd

British interior minister James Cleverly writes to London’s Metropolitan Police after an officer told a man wearing a kippa that he was too “openly Jewish” to approach an anti-Israel march.

The Home Office, or interior ministry, states that Cleverly has written to the Met, but does not offers details of the letter’s contents, saying it was a private communication.

“We welcome the Met Police’s apology, and recognize the complexities of policing fast-moving public protests, but simply being Jewish – or of any other race or religion – should never be seen as provocative,” a spokesperson says in a statement.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/uk-minister-writes-to-london-police-after-officer-implies-jewish-mans-kippa-provoked-anti-israel-crowd/

An apology from the Met

https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk/status/1781386330724843945