Chomper Higgot

An odd question since it was you who brought up the subject of what the Protesters were chanting.

I’m not deflecting from some of the protestors chanting ‘River to the sea’. Here’s an example of me not deflecting: But the Protestors are also accusing Israel of Genocide, and as linked they have a basis for doing so.

When I say the some demonstrators accuse Israel of genocide, I have a reference: “The marches have been largely peaceful. However, many demonstrators accuse Israel of genocide and a small number have shown support for Hamas, the group that led the Oct. 7 attack on Israel and which has been banned by the U.K. government as a terrorist organization.” https://abcnews.go.com/amp/International/wireStory/london-police-meet-jewish-leaders-protests-spark-concerns-109476893 Singing the ‘River to the Sea’ definitely meets my idea of what constitutes unacceptably offensive remarks. But let’s not conflate overtly offensive remarks with the plausible accusation of genocide.

I know nothing of the sort. I do know the ICJ have stated the accusation of genocide is plausible and I do know that some demonstrators accuse Israel of genocide.

It’s not a random accusation is it?! You might not agree with the accusation, but it has a basis and yes opinions differ: https://www.npr.org/2024/01/26/1227078791/icj-israel-genocide-gaza-palestinians-south-africa

Well he is an activist and he was refusing to follow the lawful instructions of a police officer. I think some of the things some participants in the demonstration are chanting are unacceptably offensive. But that’s no excuse to label the whole demonstration unacceptable or resort to calling the demonstrations an ‘aggressive mob’. Though of course I do accept there are those who would much rather the demonstrations were not permitted and the events that are driving the demonstrations were exempt from organized public opposition .

Don’t worry, your fears are unfounded.

I think that fits the description of a loud and vociferous crowd making overtly offensive remarks. ‘Aggressive Mob’ is a stretch.

The Government have at the same time cut funding to programs helping the long term sick and disabled back into work. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/21/help-disabled-people-england-wales-jobs-axed-benefits-crackdown#:~:text=The £100m Work and,would instead leave people destitute.

Agreed, but the Met should not be pejoratively profiling anyone on the basis of ethnicity, religion or any other issue than their actual behavior as it relates to the law.

No not at all. I’ve clearly stated I like the hoodie, I like the message, I rather hope it catches on. Now I accept the reason I like the hoodie and it’s message might not be precisely the same as someone else’s reason but that’s the thing with opinions, even when when folk agree something to be a good idea, they might come to that conclusion through a different perspective. I like different perspectives too. I definitely like the idea of the Met addressing the issue of making arrests on the basis of pejorative profiling. Well done to the guy with his hoodie - I like it.

I read the OP, I even quoted it above. I like the Hoodie, I rather hope it catches on.

The guy who’s the subject of this thread? I don’t know much about him.

He was an activist. As discussed in the thread in which he was the subject. Anyway, I like the hoodie, I like the message. I hope it catches on. The problem of the Met making arrests on the basis of pejorative profiling is long past needing addressing. Well done to the guy wearing the hoodie.

Trump is not a defendant in these trials of fake electors.

You got me wrong Brian, I think this is a fabulous idea, I’m sure there’s money to be made and indeed an important message to get across. The Met have a long history of profiling members of certain communities: I absolutely agree.

Should sell well to young men within other minority communities across London.

A good start. Now go after him for damages.

There’s certainly been an increase in bleating and whining.

I thought Trump was a billionaire? Why does he need anyone to pay his legal bills?

Seems you know nothing about the law. Submitting fake signed election documents to the Federal Government is a Felony. Election fraud is a felony. Reality is real!

So the fake electors are getting prosecuted and convicted for their crimes?

A bit of a false equivalence. There is only one official slate of electors. Cobbling together an alternative after losing the election is not it.

Japan is heading into its very own crisis for which this ‘homogeneous society’ of yours is not a solution. And Japan has had a few worse terrorism incidents than a guy with a fake bomb vest. And that’s before we get into the part France and other western nations have played in creating these conflicts you now insist are being imported https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/prehospital-and-disaster-medicine/article/abs/terrorism-in-japan/0395D08D87A1E7786083428B9B64831B

Not the brightest America has to offer. Conspire to commit election interference. Sign your name on forged documents used to commit election interference. Submit the forged documents with your signature on them to the Federal Government. If it were not such a serious threat to US Democracy it would be comedy gold.