"The only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews" (part three)

[stomachamelon]

Carrying on from part two....

oh wow you got me it’s completely necessary after all. No it’s not necessary

Sorry, I thought you meant it was unnecessary to remind marchers that Hamas are terrorists because they already know and agree. Which we now agree some of them don’t.

Do you think it is unnecessary to remind Hamas supporters that Hamas are terrorists, or unnecessary to do it at the march?

@EncoreMoi

I am sorry to hear of your experience.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68514821

Maybe a bit derailing but the below news seems to suggest that the marches through London are going to extend indefinitely regardless of a ceasefire being reached as it looks like Israel are taking an understandably hard line on security.

We need to decide how much money can be spent on these incessant marches and whether we need legislation to manage the marches as although I am fully behind the right to peaceful protest we seem to have to think of an end plan for the protests. Could they go on for years and is this going to be a feature of British society?.Possibly the marches will become as much a feature of London as changing of the guard.

Can we assign meaning to this Nazi salute, or is the evidence too lacking?

https://twitter.com/IhabHassane/status/1766804012110655684

He's probably just reaching out to pet a puppy.

I'm remembering the time someone on here said that those Hamas cosplayers were just wearing totally innocent headbands.

We need to decide how much money can be spent on these incessant marches and whether we need legislation to manage the marches as although I am fully behind the right to peaceful protest we seem to have to think of an end plan for the protests. Could they go on for years and is this going to be a feature of British society?.Possibly the marches will become as much a feature of London as changing of the guard

I suspect many of the loyal lefties will soon get tired of the same old and will find a new lobby hobby.

The old antisemitic trope "slaves to Zionist Jews" has made a comeback. I would absolutely love to be the Government's puppet master, but alas not.

It really shouldn't be difficult to make a point without being a massive antisemite in the process. I'm sure I'll be told it has another meaning though 🤔

https://twitter.com/jobellerina/status/1766780260563943426

Someone clearly didn't get the message that you're meant to leave the "Jew" bit off.

so The sign says nothing more than the Palestinians have a right to resist occupation.
There is no mention of Oct 7th or indeed any other Israeli massacres, just the right to resist occupation.

Everyone has that right.

’oh but’….just coming and will be ignored….

^The sign says nothing more than the Palestinians have a right to resist occupation.
There is no mention of Oct 7th^

Does there need to be? I mean, come on.

Seriously, this disingenuous bullshit is really getting old.

oh <innocent face> I didn't mean that famous and recent act of Palestinian (Hamas) resistance. I just meant the concept of resistance.

People aren't stupid, you know.

@noblegiraffe
I think there is a sense of gloating from those who stay just in the right side of the law by being suitably ambivalent about the of precise nature of resistance. The scary thing is that there are those that feel October 7th was 'resistance' and some of those people were on the marches.

It is anti semtism hiding in plain sight.

Now you accuse me of justifying violence.

This is a personal attack which is against the rules of Mumsnet and completely unfounded, so I suggest you delete what you’ve said and think about why you felt the need to sink down to that level.

As is clear from my original post below, and the many others I made, I am not justifying violence.

Regarding Niyak Ghorbani.

A factually correct sentence can take on a different meaning depending on the context in which it is presented.

So for instance while it is factually correct to say ‘all lives matter’, if somebody were to attend a Black Lives Matter protest while holding a sign saying this, you could infer that they were actually a counter protestor, or at the least trying to diminish the aim of the protest.

If somebody were to attend a protest for the hostages while holding a sign stating how many children had been killed in Gaza, it would have the same impact.

So by the same reasoning, to hold a sign saying ‘Hamas are terrorists’ implies that people need to be reminded of this or that people are marching to support Hamas, which is unnecessary and inflammatory. It can be interpreted as an attempt to detract from the main aim of the march, which is to advocate for a ceasefire and freedom for Palestinians.

Either way the point of my post was to highlight that I don’t need to agree with what this sign says to support his right to free speech, to believe that he should not be assaulted, and that he should be treated fairly by the police.

I’m not sure I genuinely believe that posters are unable to understand that the meaning of a sentence depends on the context in which it is used

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2023-12-08/harvard-penn-heads-questioned-about-antisemitism-video

context?

It's not hiding, it's tolerated, and that's abhorrent.

Absolutely. We know the games they are playing but they think we don't see it. Everything requires ' evidence ' but when it's rightly provided, it's not the right type of evidence or we've not considered context or in cases where it's irrevocable proof, it's only a ' small minority ' that may hold these views. Gaslighting plain and simple.

inflammatory. It can be interpreted as an attempt to detract from the main aim of the march

@PeasfullPerson in your opinion, given that you admit that there are Hamas supporters marching on the streets of London, when would it be appropriate to call them out?

You seem to be saying that while they are marching through London would be bad form.

I'd also know if it would be acceptable if he were holding a sign saying "Houthis are terrorists"

@PeasfullPerson .

What are in your opinion the reasons for the marches? What are they hoping to acheive?

My lay person opinion is that if there are people who support Hamas they most likely are for the majority of them not doing this out of ignorance and this is something that should be investigated and dealt with through other channels.
I also imagine as a lay person that the job of doing this has become much harder due to the amount of people that are unnecessarily pointing the finger at others and conflating support for the people of Palestine with support for Hamas. This probably means the number of people that are of potentially of interest has grown, which means resources are stretched, and that there are less well trained resources available to deal with this increase, which will result in an overall reduction of correctly identifying real threats and is detrimental to the overall safety of our country.
Thank you for having a respectful conversation with me despite our difference of opinions.

'Who are they?'

Those marching through London every week about a war thousands of miles away.

'Why now'

Months ago in reality. We've got enough problems we need to deal with here.

Vietnam was a bit different as the protests helped keep us out of that disaster. America wanted us in.

Hamas committed a horrific terrorist atrocity and war crime and they've got the backlash they must have known would come. Are the civilian casualties acceptable? No but the bloodshed is on Hamas.

This is a personal attack which is against the rules of Mumsnet and completely unfounded, so I suggest you delete what you’ve said and think about why you felt the need to sink down to that level.

Please report my post to MN if you feel I have attacked you. Please don't suggest that I "think about" anything, it's incredibly pompous.

From my perspective, attempting to justify the physical attack on Niyak Ghorbani is justifying it.

@User135644

For you, this may feel like a conflict very far away. For many of us, it is very much close to home. Our loved ones have been placed at risk and in some cases died. We, and our families, feel unsafe in the country we called home.

These are problems we deal with here, every day.

In my home area, there is a long tradition of protesting and direct action, and one thing that people have learned is that organisers and stewards on protests and demonstrations need to be mindful of the effects of these actions on others.

Disruption by itself just ends up annoying people. Disruption and aggression lead to people closing their ears to what's being said and allow the vilification of the very reason for protesting. Disruption needs to be tempered with engagement.

Protests and demonstrations can often make some people feel uncomfortable or offended. There have certainly been events which have caused me to feel those emotions. I do not have a legal right to not be offended or uncomfortable. I do, however, have a legal right to not be caused undue fear and alarm due to hate speech and aggression.

Protests, whatever the cause and whatever the format, need to strive to avoid crossing that line into causing ordinary members of society to experience fear and alarm. If people are raising concerns, then I do think organisers have a responsibility to respond, even if just to say "we're doing what we can and X or Y is a police matter", and to consider if there are additional actions needed to mitigate harm.

this