The London police are under fire this week for threatening to arrest a man wearing a kippah near a pro-Palestinian march. Officers inform Gideon Falter, head of the Campaign Against Antisemitism watchdog, that he was “antagonizing” the protesters by being “openly Jewish” near such a march. He was told that, if he tried to cross the street while being “openly Jewish,” he would be arrested for breach of the peace.
In the video, one police officer said: “You are quite openly Jewish, this is a pro-Palestinian march, I’m not accusing you of anything but I’m worried about the reaction to your presence.”
Another officer then added later: “You will be escorted out of this area so you can go about your business, go where you want freely or, if you choose to remain here, because you are causing a breach of peace with all these other people, you will be arrested.”
Falter was also told that being openly Jewish near such a march was “antagonizing”.
Activists have long protested the dangers of “driving while black” in prompting stops by police and threats of arrest. Falter appears to have established a danger of “walking while Jewish” in London.
The Metropolitan Police later apologized, but had to issue a second apology after saying in a now deleted statement that
“In recent weeks we’ve seen a new trend emerge, with those opposed to the main protests appearing along the route to express their views. The fact that those who do this often film themselves while doing so suggests they must know that their presence is provocative, that they’re inviting a response and that they’re increasing the likelihood of an altercation.”
Calling an openly Jewish man “provocative” only reaffirmed the original statements made by the officers. As a result, the police had to issue a new statement, which said that the previous one had “been removed. We apologize for the offense it caused.”
What is equally disturbing is the threat to arrest a man who was doing nothing wrong based on his identity. These threats were being made as protesters were hurling abuses at him because he is Jewish.
Notably, the United Kingdom has embraced a wide array of criminalized speech, arresting people for hateful or denigrating comments made against groups or individuals.
A man was convicted for sending a tweet while drunk referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”
We also discussed the arrest of a woman who was praying to herself near an abortion clinic. English courts have seen criminalized “toxic ideologies” as part of this crackdown on free speech.
I have opposed those laws. Yet, this incident illustrates the arbitrary enforcement of such laws. The police simply ignored the anti-Semitic comments being leveled at Falter and confronted him on being openly Jewish. That is not to say that I favor the enforcement of criminal speech laws. Rather, it shows the added danger of such laws in their selective enforcement.
Well that’s what happens when you don’t have a Constitution. That’s why so many people are trying to get rid of ours and it’s the main difference between this case and the Seattle case. In America, freedom of speech is enshrined in law. I don’t know about the UK. I don’t think it’s the same. And since freedom of speech isn’t really a thing there, I think cops have the legal right to enforce the peace any way they see fit. I’m not saying I like it, just that I think the legal basis is different.
“That’s why so many people are trying to get rid of ours” Who?
BS. The only people trying to get rid of our constitution are the the orange god and his minions. There is not, I repeat, NOT, an attempt to get rid of the constitution by any significant number of people outside of the orange god circle.
Bless your heart
Exactly so since the demoncrat regime already got rid of it, whilst the republicons cannot.
What are you talking about? What part of the constitution has been done away with? Please elaborate.
Anonymous, that’s thoughtful. The difference in legal basis makes this blog possible. One thing that this writer sees is We The People starting with an idea in the Declaration of Independence that ends the tenure of Divine Right for monarchs, and recognizes that the body of inalienable rights has always been vested in individuals. That was an historical first, followed by the Constitution. Now We The People have a republic. And Ben Franklin’s admonition that it’s up to us to keep it. I’m well disposed to the idea that this blog aims at exactly that.
I actually think encouraging Falter to go elsewhere to exercise his free speech was absolutely the correct move. Police are there to maintain overall peace in emotionally charged situations. To not factor the possibility for chaos erupting from public confrontation in any given situation is absolutely within the purveyance of police strategy. It’s why gangs are separated in group housing units in prisons, for crissakes…
Or why your boy trump will be isolated wherever he ends up…
To that end, I’d love to hear your response to the accusation that you, personally, are acting as a tool for trump getting around his gag order in NY, Jon? That when you speculate on witness lying in the trial while doing live fox hits that you’re just acting as a live arm to speak trump’s piece in a way he’s been sanctioned against? What say you, bruh?
I am not trying to be antagonistic, but what does the former president have to do with a speech issue in London?
@williamdowney5 Re: “but what does the former president have to do with a speech issue in London?..” It is usual and customary for contributors to these pages to launch themselves out of the topic at hand and engage in political diatribe for their own edification. Having said that, I can appreciate the ‘Trump will be isolated’, point clearly. The one characteristic of Trump that has irked me from day one is his inability to know when it might be in his best interests to keep his unsophisticated mouth shut and let someone with a tad more polish and astute politically to be his mouthpiece. It is why, from the many opinions I have heard, people will not support him, his platform notwithstanding. However, that is his cross to bear and so became this nation’s for the past 3.5 years. Going forward, the pieces will fall where they may.
Indeed. Trump obviously harbors fascist and authoritarian hopes and desires and one of the main speculations about him is: what if someone came along who was able to get across those same hopes and desires in a less buffoon-ish way? That would really dangerous…
But people like Turley have stepped in to try to get that accomplished. Jury is still out on whether Turley and others will be successful in their scheme.
@Anonymous
You are an utterly ridiculous person.
I suppose I should care more about what your thoughts were.
@ZZDoc – without copy and paste your remark regarding President Trumps “unsophisticated mouth” are you suggesting Biden is Cicero reborn? Those with their sophisticated mouths have BS’d our country into it’s current state. It’s not what you say or how you say it, in the end it’s what your administration accomplishes. President Trump was and continues to be vilified by coordinated attacks by the msm and sophisticated political foe’s fearing the loss of power and dollars. I hope there are more Americans today who appreciate performance over sophisticated lies?
Metaphorically, that scene in London would be effectively comparable to trump’s presence in an American prison. And would have the same inflammatory results.
One could maintain that white supremacist gangs would come to trump’s aid in prison. But they’d be outnumbered (hence the need to iso trump in prison). Just like Falter, and whoever sympathized with him, would’ve been outnumbered at that particular demonstration in London.
@Anonymous
Not metaphorically, actually quite literally, If you were obsessed with and stalked a non-public figure like you do Trump, you’d have restraining orders and even possibly be in jail. Nobody is listening to your drivel. Who knew pixels could also be toilet paper? 🙄
Hard to stalk someone who repulses you.
is that why they call you ‘lawn boy’? did your boss sequester you away from people, places, and events, out of sight?
The govt managing the operation of its incarceration practices, have zero to do with free speech. Inmates have, through their criminal actions, sacrificed access to some of their rights.
Terrible analogy
I see you use the adjectives ‘terrible’ and ‘inconvenient ‘ interchangeably in the realm of metaphor.
“What you say, bruh”. Now that’s real jive.
When you say ‘jive’ it certainly dates you, doesn’t it?
Funny you say that when Trump has just been to fast food and a famous bodega and was roundly loved and hugged and the celebration was great, while biden tried to copy that and failed miserably – stumbling around by himself and pointing his finger to guess which way his handlers wanted him to shuffle.
So the exact opposite of your premise is visibly true.
Rather it shows trump is adept at strategically planting actors to create an image. Just the descent down the golden escalator played out at a Bodega. Just add some secret service.
no, john kasich did that (planting people). Trump’s ego would believe he had no need for plants. so you are very wrong.
So, if – for instance – a group of fundamentalism Muslims gathers to protest the immodest dress of Western women, and I happen to want to cross the street near them while wearing pants and with my hair uncovered, I’m the problem?
If you forced yourself into the middle of the demonstration to disrupt it there very well be a strong reaction to your presence. That’s just common sense.
And before the inevitable attack comes at me for posting leftist interpretation on a rightist blog, a) this place isn’t a ‘demonstration’,, and b) despite rightist paid troll activity here the place isn’t owned by rightists.., you’re just Turley’s curated audience.
Notwithstanding the observation made by Turley and other with respect to the multiple issue surrounding this occurrence, memory serves the recent death of a Jewish counter-protester in California at the hands of an individual supporting the Palestinian cause. The irrational behavior of a partisan to one side of a issue towards a partisan to the other cannot be disregarded. The means by which confrontation is de-escalated and avoided, of course, begs a modicum of sophistication which, with respect to some individuals,unfortunately becomes a great deal to ask or expect.
I see the cops’ behavior in this case as indistinguishable from how they’d react to a man smoking while filing up at the gas pump. In both cases the reaction is in response to the presence of a feared combustable, one, which if ignited, would rapidly flare into a destructive force beyond their control. This sad state of affairs, one in which basic freedoms must be treated as flammable, represents the inevitable consequence of treating violent protest as a right and responsible law enforcement as a crime. Activists on the Left — in our colleges, courts, and media — have emboldened the destructors and castrated the protectors, and without protection from lawlessness, there can be no lawful freedoms.
One’s freedom of speech should not be abridged because one is opposed to the views being expressed in a demonstration.
“freedom of speech should not be abridged”… let’s not ignore the likely outcome had there been no abridgment. The protest crowd would’ve set upon the solitary counter-protestor, at which time, in order to protect the solitary man’s right to life, the police would’ve been forced to intervene. However, rather than being authorized to use whatever force necessary, the police would’ve been permitted to use only that level of force that could not bring about increased crowd violence, property destruction, or political blowback, nor threaten the officers with job loss and/or criminal prosecution. In other words, the police would’ve been authorized to use a level of force that does not exist. Small wonder they chose the lesser of two evils.
Please understand the point: without brave protectors properly authorized and fully supported by the legal system, the notion of a guaranteed freedom is an illusion.
From wikipedia: The phrase ‘politically correct’ first appeared in the 1930s, when it was used to describe dogmatic adherence to ideology in authoritarian regimes, such as Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Early usage of the term politically correct by leftists in the 1970s and 1980s was as self-critical satire; usage was ironic, rather than a name for a serious political movement. It was considered an in-joke among leftists used to satirize those who were too rigid in their adherence to political orthodoxy. The modern pejorative usage of the term emerged from conservative criticism of the New Left in the late 20th century, with many describing it as a form of censorship.
Free speech and good/bad policing. Jonathan’s report on Meinecke v City of Seattle in the 9th Circuit has a quote of the police report that flopped as a defense: “[w]hen resources allowed in the past[,] SPD would try and keep the two opposing groups separated.” That is hardly the sort of concrete proof necessary to establish that restricting Meinecke’s speech was the only way to avoid violence….“. That reads like a head on collision between defund the police and the duty to uphold the protection of speech. To what extent is that also a head on collision between strict scrutiny and woke?
I think the yellow 6 pointed stars are coming soon to a city near you in the UK. Will there now be streets that have large yellows stars with a large black mark struck through them to signify that Jews cannot walk there, “for their own safety, of course.” Seems that the fascists that were in the UK prior to World War 2 have endured with a new birth contributed by people coming from outside the country without much in the way of controls. Sounds like New York is now a suburb of London, maybe Berkeley also.
Really don’t remember much of this being so apparent until that new president took office on 1/20/2009. Seems like antisemitism and racism took a flying leap back into American Culture with the advent of the Obama administration. It was never extinct and we were not perfect but we were growing so much closer to being truly all Americans until Obama hit the ground in Washington. One man at the lever of power let loose the hell-hounds of victimhood, racism, antisemitism, tribalism and the Democratic Party lapped it up and made it a platform.
@GEB
Yup. Obama was and is all of that. What a wasted opportunity, and generationally, as a result, we have been dragged backward by decades.
This is obscene, and we cannot let it get to this point in America. Protect 1A, 2A, and the courts as though life depended on it, because it does.
Aided and abetted by his wife.
What has happened to the world? In the 30’s the Jewish community was forced to identify themselves with a yellow Star of David or paint one on their business. Now the British who fought for their own lives and put an end to the barbarism against the Jews engage in questionable behavior of their own. “Your quite openly Jewish” what the hades has happened to our greatest allies? Most importantly what is happening to the world? Will I have to hide the cross about my neck or the Burka about your face? How can the children, grandchildren and great grandchildren of the Greatest Generation F things up so badly?
How long before UK invites Jews to live in “protected communities” so that they don’t trigger adverse feelings in others?
I seem to remember a particular national socialist party which took over a country and had trouble with the presence of Jews. How soon will London fire up gas chambers, or will they find a different solution to the problem?
@Old George: ‘How soon will London fire up the gas chambers…? They might be obliged to wait until the last survivor of the London Blitz has passed, along with the memory of the ‘Antisemite’ whose purpose was to ravage Great Britain and the world.
I think at this point, UK and especially London, might be a woke lost cause. These “apologies” from the London police seem to be a weekly occurrence but there doesn’t appear to be any internal change taking place to correct these problems. What are they apologizing for exactly? Threatening to arrest the Jewish man or for their failure to enforce their own speech laws against the the hamas protesters? Why are these speech crimes being so arbitrarily enforced, and for that matter, why the hell are there speech crimes in the first place? Isn’t there anyone in the UK that sees this as a problem? What’s next spectral crimes?
Rishi Sunak’s criticism of the Scots’ “hate speech” legislation seems to have fizzled.
The Jews’ “presence is provocative, that [the Jews are] inviting a response and that [the Jews are] increasing the likelihood of an altercation.”
The Metropolitan Police attempted to sanitize their anti-Semitism by using pronouns (“those, they”). Pronouns are also a handy way of dehumanizing individuals.
I merely made the obvious obvious, by replacing the pronouns with their referent.
I am Openly American, I don’t display an American Flag on my vehicle’s rear View Mirror, I sing the National Anthem in my head when it is broadcasted at the beginning of a Sports Event, I keep my Nose to the Grinding Wheel when at work and quietly focus, I don’t Litter, I respect Nature, I pay all my Taxes, I differ to traffic and move with the Flow. I dislike; 1) Liars, 2) Cheats, 3) Inequality …
I just want to Live, Freely and Unencumbered by ‘The Rest’.
Be careful, you just might provoke those people who chant “Death to America” in your neighborhood. I would hate for you to be arrested for being an American in America,,,,
While I agree and also generally live by the policy you describe (except that I fly the flag and have a cross on my rearview mirror), I’m reminded of the English nursery rhyme, “Don’t care didn’t care” and of Martin Niemöller’s “First they came…” poem.
My interpretation – and maybe the answer to your unwritten question – is that if we don’t take a stand for the truly good things that we admire and respect then those with nulling, ulterior motives (and their mouth-breathing goon squads) will try to force us to accept their unrighteous and often malicious counterviews. While I doubt this’ll be news to you but humanity’s track record is not a good one in this regard. I’m certainly not advocating we emulate the Left’s tactics or their penchant for violence – although we may end up being forced to physically defend ourselves and our rights – but if we don’t make a stand now, we may find the road back to be a difficult one.
Don’t care didn’t care,
Don’t care was wild:
Don’t care stole plum and pear
Like any beggar’s child.
Don’t care was made to care,
Don’t care was hung:
Don’t care was put in a pot
And boiled till he was done.
Anonymous, It is sometimes good to to remain quiet, unprovocative, and move with the Flow. I usually remain silent when reading other’s opinions on the “Res ipsa loquitur” site, while some prefer to parry and thrust with their words. A few seem to just enjoy trolling others. Such are the freedoms of speech, association, and conscious. Of the people of Abrahamic codes, Jews (who were taught to live as a people apart from the rest of world), Christians (who were taught God’s Kingdom is not of this world and to render unto Caesar), and Muslims (who were taught Abrogation, Qur’an 9, Jihad, and a world divided between Dar Al-Islam and Dar al-Harb), I suspect that Jews being the smallest group should be the least able to provoke a violent confrontation but have the most to fear. The man watching the pro Palestinian march while being “openly Jewish” is braver than me, but maybe he just has a lot more to lose which motivates to him stand up to those who would encumber his freedoms of speech, association, and conscious.
Initially I wondered if the police officer was acting under a well intentioned but misbegotten “for your own good” rationale. This is much to the contrary. “For your own good” would not have been good, but “you are not good” (I.e., you provoke others merely by being) is very bad indeed.
Islam has ALWAY bbeen a source of hate and violence troughout the world how quickly we were made to forget 9/11
Whimsicalmama: You’re right about Islam always being a source of hate and violence. Thomas Jefferson was the first American President to deal with the issue during his administration both diplomatically and then tactically by sending ships to the Barbary Coast to defend merchant vessels from Ottoman pirates.
Makes for fascinating reading.
—Paula
See ‘Mr. Jefferson’s War’ although I have forgotten the author’s name.
Thank you, William. I’ll give it a read.
—Paula
Would they have done the same to a man wearing a Palestinian keffiyeh at a pro-Israel rally?
What am I saying – the pro-Israeli group would not be given a permit
Can people in England get arrested for going around being openly female or openly white also?
It is OK to be openly palestinian – for now. How long will that last? That is certainly provocative to some. If the government tolerates, or worse excuses, violence based on provocation, the world will be very homogeneous.
I thought diversity was both good and the goal.
“I thought diversity was both good and the goal.”
Only for certain “diverse” types — those who seek the unearned.
Probably, the phrase being openly “female” could be a problem, especially if you were flaunting it around as it could be highly offensive to trans people. Being openly while might be alright unless you were provocative about it, ie. being overly white in your whiteness, such as walking a poodle, having picnics, playing golf, driving a volvo. That sort of thing…
Volvo carmaker belongs now to Chinese investors…
One is being “openly Jewish”, the other ones being openly Nazi.
go figger…
It starts with the little things… “we gotta keep you safe”. Covid, .. pedo’s, .. terrorists…. we will protect you with these new powers we now bestow on ourselves in the name of protecting you, … and the children. We’re protecting the children so give us this power.
And why does it happen?
Because we say; “…oh okay as long as its for the children” …… “oh okay as long as its to keep us safe”…
Freedom dies not by a bang, but by a whimper.
It starts with the little things… “we gotta keep you safe”. Covid, .. pedo’s, .. terrorists
““Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
CS Lewis
When are they going to require that all Jews sew yellow Stars of David on their clothes?
Coming soon to a “Death to America” neighborhood near you!
Whimsicalmama, the Yellow Stars will arrive when the Left can force all white people to admit that they are subhuman racists. The Left is working on the latter, and the former won’t be far behind.
Western Communists failed to divide and conquer the West along class lines, so they invented Critical Theory to divide along race and sex. It has proven politically robust, not because racism and sexism are endemic (they’re not), but rather because too many Whites are surprisingly susceptible to stupid, suicidal ideas. Black sheep don’t have to be black, and without willing Whites, Wokism is dead.
The woke mind virus is just another version of the Stockholm Syndrome. Some people are capable of betraying anything to win acceptance. If we ever emerge from this madness, we better not forget who they were.
Yes. We enabled this. Did all those men die during WWII and we learned nothing? Hell; we’ve forgotten the lessons of 9/11 with the likes of haakeem jeffries on the cusp of running the House.