Correct me if I’m wrong but the term “Antisemitism” refers to hostility, prejudice, or discrimination against a person for being Jewish. Have I got that right or not? I think I have. So with that in mind, can anybody see why anybody would say that the following is an “antisemitic comment”?
“pretty much the only two people who currently oppose the Rothschilds and the banking cartel…”
Within that comment I fail to see any hostility, any prejudice or any discrimination. I fail to see any mention of the Jewish faith. So how can it be “antisemitic”?
The above comment was posted in response to this image which was posted on Facebook by former funny man Dom Joly
As you can see, the guy who posted the comment, Gaz Weeks, was simply pointing out that Putin and Jong-Un oppose the Rothschild and banking cartel. Nothing more. There was no expansion on his comment. There was no reference to being Jewish. There was no opinion expressed whatsoever. Gaz simply pointed out a fact. Russia and North Korea, if our media is to be believed (I know, don’t laugh) do indeed oppose Rothschild controlled banks along with the rest of the Western banking cartel.
It was Joly himself who then responded to Gaz and bizarrely claimed that his comment was antisemitic! The only way I can see Gaz’s comment being antisemitic in any way would be if 1. The definition of antisemitism was changed to mean you can not talk about Jewish people or Jewish familes. 2. Gaz said something negative about Jews such as implying it is ok to oppose the Rothschilds because they’re Jews… He didn’t and so I fail to see where the antisemitism that Dom Joly took so much offence to.
Several other people seemed as baffled as me and commented on the thread telling Dom that there was no antisemitism and in fact it was Dom himself that brought religious belief into the conversation.
Gaz pointed out to Dom that he was not being antisemitic and said he respects Joly as a comic but said that other than that he would like to kick Dom in the shin. A light hearted jokey comment I’m sure you’ll agree… Well, not Dom! He decided to respond with this…
His reply was questioned again by other people struggling to see the antisemitism in anything Gaz had said. I decided to ask him myself “How is opposing Rothschild antisemitic?”. I know that Gaz hadn’t opposed Rothschild but this was clearly what Dom had an issue with. I asked him whether it would make you a racist and prejudice against black people if you didn’t like Barack Obama? I asked him whether it would make you a sexist and against women if you opposed Killery Clinton? I tried to lighten the mood by poking fun at Trump too and suggested it was silly to pull the racism card on Gaz when there was nothing antisemitic about his comment. Joly got a little trigger happy with firing off insults with his response and tried to pull Gaz back into the fray by tagging him…
So I’m a “nasty moron” it seems. I laughed at how unhinged his comment seemed to be. Had he lost the plot. Where did Gaz imply that the Rothschilds were part of a banking cartel who “secretly control the world” and even if he did say that, how the hell is that antisemitic!? Because Rothschild is Jewish? So using Joly’s warped sense of logic you are antisemitic to say anything negative about a person who just so happens to be of Jewish faith even when your negative comments have no connection to that person’s religious beliefs. That would mean we can’t criticise movies staring a Jewish actor like Adam Sandler or Shia LaBeouf and that we must always laugh at every joke David Baddiel tells otherwise you’re a “nasty moron”. Using his same unhinged standards you might well argue that Joly is a racist against Koreans and Russians for sharing a post that makes fun of one Russian and one North Korean… I wouldn’t but a silly over sensitive individual who wants to pull the race card on those who disagree with them might well do.
I posted again and said
“It’s no more antisemitic [to slag off Rothschild and the banking cartel] than saying ‘Kanye West is shit is racist…”
I pointed out to the not so jolly Joly that Gaz’s post was simply stating a fact whilst his own comment labelling people as antisemites was potentially libellous. An alert flashed up on my phone telling me “Dom Joly mentioned you in a comment on his post”. This was his response…
So now I’m “Scum” along with being a “nasty moron”. Charming. His reply resulted in even more people siding against him and agreeing with me. I was unsure what “anti semitic lingo” I or indeed Gaz had used which had upset the comic and so had to ask.
I also pointed out that if a person opposes the Rothschild family because of their standing in the world of banking and financial control that does NOT make them an antisemite. I personally have a grievance with the wealth possessed by families like Rothschild, Rockerfella, Windsor etc whilst there is so much poverty in the world. It’s the disproportionate distribution of wealth that I oppose and that the religious beliefs of any of those people have no baring on me opposing their actions and hording of wealth. If however a person were to oppose the Rothschild family BECAUSE THEY’RE JEWISH then yes, they’re a racist and I would happily stand shoulder to shoulder with Mr Joly and shout “Scum” or “nasty moron”. Being of the Jewish faith does not give you total immunity to criticism for your behaviour and actions and also a person’s behaviour does not reflect their religion. His response?
He deleted the thread from his post.
I was tempted to post a new comment and start a new thread but what would be the point? Maybe Gaz deleted it cause he couldn’t be arsed with Dom’s mindless rants and the constant alerts? I don’t know to be honest but what I do know is that Joly, who I actually have a lot of time for in his TV programmes like Trigger Happy TV, seems to actually be a bit of a dickhead.
He should stick to playing pranks and acting the clown. And just for the record, criticising Dom Joly does not mean I have an issue with Lebanese people!
“The call was passed out over the radio that the security at Morrisons had detained a shop lifter and were asking for assistance from the Police. A call like this is graded as an emergency so we flicked on the blues and flew straight across to the shop. That annoyed me when I arrived because obviously every time you respond with lights and sirens you are putting people at risk. We got there and some bloke in jeans and a t-shirt came running up to us excitedly saying “nice one lads, she’s in here, come on” and scurried off. We had no idea who he was, no badge, ID or anything to suggest he was a part of the security team. I stopped him and asked who he was and he told us he was an ‘Undercover Store Detective’ and it was him that had caught the ‘shoppy’ and that his colleague was sitting with her now. He opened the door to what looked like a broom cupboard with a table and chair crammed into it. There was a a lanky security guard stood with his arms crossed across his chest with a stupid grin on his face. He told us later ‘this is my first catch’, hence the excitement I think.
Sitting in the chair was a woman who looked to be in her late 30’s. She was wearing a trouser suit and had black leather satchel like bag with her. She wouldn’t have looked out of place as the store manager. She was sobbing uncontrollably as soon as she saw me enter the broom cupboard. Before I could even speak she was begging forgiveness. My partner took the security guards out of the office whilst I sat with the suspect. A few minutes later he came back in with 4 items in his hand. He placed them on the table. Two of Morrisons finest microwave meals currently on a 2 for £6 offer and two £3 DVDs. Pepper Pig and Ben 10. The woman howled and began crying even louder.
My colleague told me that the ‘Undercover Store Detective’ had been patrolling the store and had seen the suspect put the items into her satchel. He thought she was using it to carry her shopping to the till at first because he said she didn’t look like a ‘shoppy’ but she walked straight passed to tills and to the exit. There was some discrepancy as to whether she had actually left the store and completed the offence but he was certain she had and would check CCTV for us. I asked the woman her name, date of birth, address and I ran her through the PNC. Nothing at all came back on her. I asked for a check to be done on her address and surely enough it was recorded but under her husband’s name and they were only recorded as being victims of a burglary the previous year.
So this wasn’t your usual shoplifter. I passed her a tissue from the pack I carry in my stab vest and asked her what had happened. Her story was that 8 months previously she had been made redundant from her admin role at a local hospital where she had worked for 15 years. The had 2 kids, a 5 and a 7 year old. They had struggled on for the first couple of months on just her husbands wage as she tried her hardest to get a new job. Then disaster struck when her husband’s firm went into administration and her husband lost his job too. They had lost all income, had fallen behind on bills and mortgage payments, they had not been able to celebrate Christmas properly and although her husband had found a new job which didn’t pay enough, she had been to one failed interview after another and was still out of work. They were still behind on bills and all money was going on feeding her kids and paying the essential utilities.
That day she had been to an interview, hence her dress and appearance, and was very confident when she left. She was on her way home when they called her so she pulled into Morrisons car park to take the call. Sadly, another failed interview. She told us that she couldn’t face going home to her kids and husband again and giving them bad news and so she decided what she needed was to feel like she had provided for her kids and to see a smile on their faces.
She had taken the meals for their tea and the DVDs were to see them smile and so they could sit and watch them in their bedroom whilst her and her husband talked. I don’t mind admitting, her story and her emotions made me choke up a couple of times. Ultimately what we had here was a mother who was desperate that she was willing to cross a line she had never even considered before and break the law to provide a meal and a smile for her kids. She fully understood what she had done and was more than apologetic. She was petrified that now she was going to be arrested for theft she would never find a job….that’s when I made my decision.
I used my discretion. I knew my partner would agree cause we were so much alike. I told the woman not to worry and to try and compose herself and I left the room. The two guards were right outside the door like two puppies awaiting praise and a treat. The uniformed one asked “Have you locked her up?”. I told them that I hadn’t locked her up and that I wasn’t going to either. They froze on the spot, their tales no longer wagging. They told me that I MUST lock her up cause that is their company policy. I told them that their company can’t have a policy that dictates what Police Officers do and that I have ultimate discretion in this situation and I don’t believe that criminalising this woman is the best way forward nor is it in the public interest. I explained her situation.
The ‘undercover’ guard was on my side. He agreed that it’s not the best solution. The uniformed guard was more upset at losing his first catch. I tried several times to get him on side but he wasn’t having it and so in the end I simply told him it was tough. It was my choice and the lady would not be getting arrested today. We all crammed back into the room and I explained to the woman that she would not be getting arrested and that we were going to take her out of the store and have a chat in our car. Lanky, obviously upset we had stolen his catch butted in with ‘But you are barred for life from this store’. She burst into tears again. She begged him to reconsider as she lived just around the corner, had shopped their all her life and couldn’t afford to travel to the next nearest supermarket every time they needed something. The guard was unrelenting and insisted it was ‘company policy’.
My colleague questioned whether he has the authority to do that given that he isn’t actually a Morrisons employee and when he confirmed he did have authority my colleague assured her that he would speak with the manager and let her know (he did do and the manager was fantastic and allowed her back into the store). When we got the woman back to her car I provided her with details of local groups and charities such as the Salvation Army which would be able to help her and her family and she couldn’t thank us enough and promised never to do something so stupid again.
When I spoke to my supervisor to get the call finalised I was shouted at. I was told that I should have arrested her and that it will take some ‘clever wording’ in order write off the call to comply with the National Crime Recording Standard. I was told it was my duty and that I will probably now have to go and arrest her from home. I told him that wasn’t going to happen and that if he thinks that is the best way to deal with somebody in her situation then he can go and drag her out of the house in front of her kids. As it happens the call was finalised and the woman wasn’t arrested. Job well done in my eyes.”
The above is a true story told to me by a serving officer. I use it because I think it demonstrates well the human side of policing. Here we had two officers whose “duty” dictated they arrest the shoplifter but whose morals dictated they help the woman and their morals won. I don’t think any good person can argue or criticise the officers for the way they dealt with the situation. Had it been another officer who attended the call the woman could well have been arrested, charged and walked away with a criminal record which could potentially prevent her finding employment. But this is just one example of many where Police Officers have to fight between their morals and their duty and quite often duty wins for reasons I will go into.
Over the last week I have spoken to many Police Constables who have answered several questions for me to help with my blogs and a project/campaign I am working on. One of those questions was;-
Has there ever been a time when you have been instructed to carry out a duty as a Police Officer which clashed with your personal morals and beliefs and if so, how did it make you feel and how did you deal with it?
The following are some of the answers I received.
“I am dead against fox hunting so when I was told I was policing the hunt to stop hunt saboteurs I objected. I explained to my boss that I didn’t feel I could because I don’t agree with fox hunting but I was pretty much told he doesn’t care what I agree or disagree with, I am a Police Officer and will do my duty. Having to “protect” these sick bastards while they scared and killed foxes made me feel ashamed for the first time in 17 years of being a Police Officer”.
“It drives me mental when people call the Police to say “there are kids playing in the street and being noisy” and then we get sent along to move them on even though they have done nothing wrong. They are just playing in the street and having fun for god sake. It’s not late at night or early in the morning, they are not committing crime, they are not even being anti-social or breaching the peace! The are PLAYING. Yet we get ordered by supervision to ‘move them on’ because we have a ‘duty to the public’ and must ‘maintain public confidence’… Well it might make the person complaining happy when we move harmless kids away but it doesn’t do much for maintaining the confidence of the youths, of their friends and family when they tell them they were chased off by the Police. Obviously if they are being rude, committing any offences, targeting somebody… we would have no issue dealing with them but all this does is make us look like bullies driving around scaring kids and spoiling their fun.”
“I got deployed with a team to prevent a breach of the peace whilst bailiffs evicted a man who had not been paying his mortgage. When we got there there was a removal van, about half a dozen bailiffs and removal men and they were waiting for us before they went up to the address. There was already a crowd gathered outside defending the man and who were angry and shouting at the bailiffs. My Sergeant spoke to the fella in charge and made sure the paperwork was above board and legal. We had to move the crowd back which obviously resulted in pushing and shoving and arguing with insults being thrown our way. We stood for about 2 hours separating the crowd from the property. The evictee was crying. Officially we were there to prevent any crime taking place but to the public we were HELPING the bailiffs evict a man. I felt guilty. I felt like stepping aside and letting the crowd through and helping this man get his house and possessions back. I couldn’t because I had a legal duty to prevent breaches of the peace and protect and preserve life and property.”
“Fracking is something I am 100% dead against and so when I took part in training to police protests at fracking sites I began asking myself how I would react when expected to stand guard outside one and prevent protesters gaining access. Truth is, I would WANT to let them in and even help them stop the fracking but I would HAVE to do my job and fulfil my duty and follow lawful orders. That really causes a moral dilemma and conflict”.
So here I have highlighted just a few of the jobs and duties expected from a Police Constable which cause internal battles with their own morals and beliefs. Jobs where their sense of lawful duty takes precedence over their morals. Police Officers may sum it up by saying “We’re just doing our job”. In part 2 of this blog I am going to look at the consequences of them doing the opposite and standing by their beliefs AND ask where exactly a Police Officer would draw the line at simply “doing their job” and following orders.
This blog is more me thinking aloud.
I am writing this blog for the public. For the people wanting to rise up and make a stand against the UK Government. For the people who plan to attend one of the many anti-austerity marches this year.
I am also writing this for the Police Officers who are tasked with Policing these marches. Police Officers who can relate to many of those marching having spent the last 5 years seeing their own pay, working conditions, pensions and living conditions being hacked away by the Tories. Police Officers who have nothing more than their strong sense of duty preventing them opening the cordon and letting the crowd through the gates of Downing Street. Officers who are doing their duty but some of whom I know for a fact want to be part of the march but would face certain dismissal and possible criminal charges if they did so.
Both sides are against the austerity being inflicted upon the nation. Both sides are suffering various levels of pain at the hands of this tyrannical government. Both sides (with perhaps a few exceptions) did not want the Tories back in power. Both side have a common enemy but will, over the course of the year, end up going head to head in battle on the streets of London and dare I say other major cities.
The protesters will march. The Police will march and contain.
The protesters will increase their numbers and try and break containment. The Police will increase their cordons.
The protesters will begin to venture off track. The Police will begin to kettle.
The protesters will begin pushing and shoving. The Police will begin pushing and shoving too.
Things will get thrown, batons will get drawn. Police will get hit, protesters will get hit.
The Police will use the media to claim the protesters were thugs and violent. The protesters will use social media to claim the Police were thugs and violent.
Protesters will be caught on camera breaking the law and face justice. Police will be caught on camera breaking the law and they too will face justice.
Both sides will take casualties. Public property will get damaged. Innocents will get caught in the fracas and they too will get injured by either side.
And whilst all of this goes on and the public pick a side and begin condemning the other, the common enemy, the people responsible for this uprising, the people who hide behind the Police Officers’ strong sense of duty whilst simultaneously attacking both warring factions will sit in their fortresses laughing at the chaos in the streets below but vehemently condemn in front of the camera.
The Government will condemn the protesters and deny they were responsible in any way for the public dissent. The Government will criticise the Police for their slow response time, their lack of resources, their lack of equipment and the actions they took. They set the two sides against each other then sit back and attack them both again and again….and we let it happen time and time again.
These protest which we are seeing and will continue to see in increasing numbers and strength are directed toward the same Government, the same enemy that the Police have faced for the last 5 years but have been prevented by law from doing anything about it or to protest in any way.
The difficulty is that the Police are sworn to protect ALL person and ALL property without showing any favour to either side. You may argue that by stopping the protesters reaching their targets and by using force against the protesters that they are showing favour towards the enemy. However, I assure you that if the Tories were to suddenly man up and come outside of their fortresses and try to get at the protesters, if they decided to stop hiding behind their fences and the duty of the Police and try to fight back, the Police would 100% absolutely stop them too. They would use force where necessary and would make arrests for any crimes they committed. That is because although I am sure the vast majority would love to see David Cameron or George Osborne get given a slap or a bit of a beating, they MUST act without fear or favour and protect each person (even their own enemy) from danger…That is the nature of Police work and that is what they are duty bound to do. To do any different, to step aside and us gain access to Downing St, Westminster Palace, Tory HQ or any other Government building would guarantee they got the sack and faced criminal charges for neglect of duty and misconduct. They would absolutely face greater convictions than any single protester.
So why not box clever and rather than play the games of our enemy, rather than go to war with each other, rather than protesting against austerity, cuts and the Tory tyranny but then attacking physically and verbally other victims of this regime, co-operate and protest in an alternative manner?
What does/has attacking Police with barriers, cones, bricks, rocks, sticks and smoke bombs achieved for the cause?
What has punching, kicking, elbowing, headbutting, baton striking or spraying protesters achieved for the Police?
Both sets of actions have simply brought both parties into disrepute and seen them facing public criticism and legal action. Counter productive and does nothing to alter the course we are heading. Nor does it have any impact upon the common enemy, David Cameron and the Tory party.
The Police are absolutely NOT going to engage in violent protest. But imagine the impact it would have on WORLD media and the Government if the Police stood amongst or side by side with rather then surrounding or kettling the protesters.
If the protests remained friendly and non-violent with nothing being thrown, nothing being burned, nothing being damaged and no reason or excuse given for the Police to draw their batons or begin cordoning or kettling then the exact same message could be expressed without the enemy and it’s media being able to criticise anybody at all.
It isn’t only the protesters who would need to make a change in their actions and attitudes. The Police would need to recognise that these men and women are marching and protesting against something they too have been victim of for half a decade. They would need to be a little more tolerant and understanding and recognise that these people represent them and their grievances too. That these people are doing what the Police have been wanting to do for 5yrs but have been prevented from doing so by law. To remain calm and use alternative methods of policing the marches and dare I say, question orders given to the contrary.
A simple gesture such as standing together facing the Government Buildings rather than the crowd would show a participation, a protest without actually “protesting”. A sign of defiance against the Government and solidarity with the community NOT the enemy.
The Police Officers policing these events would need to stand together as one in their actions. They can’t sack or discipline everybody after all.
John Lennon said
“When it gets down to having to use violence the you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you; pull your beard, flick your face to make you fight [they will use the presence of the Police to do this that is what you all need to recognise] Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don’t know how to handle is non-violence and humour”
These protests would have so much more impact if the public recognise the restraints placed upon the Police and the fact that THEY CAN NOT ALLOW THE LAW TO BE BROKEN NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY MAY DESPISE THE GOVERNMENT. The Police also need to recognise that the public partaking in these protests only want the same as you. Fairness, Equality and the Tory scum out of power. BOTH sides need to accept that those responsible for the austerity are the ones fuelling the violence and the moment either side resort to aggression the Government has won again.
The Public is the Police and the Police is the Public. Uniting as one would have unquestionable impact.
METROPOLITAN POLICE OFFICERS FEEL LIKE THEY “ARE DROWNING UNDER AN AVALANCHE” DUE TO STAFF SHORTAGE, INCREASED WORKLOADS AND POLICE “REFORMS”
Front line Officers working within the Metropolitan Police Service feel like they are drowning with the immense pressure they facing on a daily basis due to “Police Reforms”.
Constables working in Neighbourhood Policing or “SAFER NEIGHBOURHOODS” as it used to be called once worked in teams of 6 covering a reasonably sized electoral ward or area.
The six person team would be made up of 1 Police Sergeant, 2 Police Constables and 3 Police Community Support Officers.
Now they have moved to a new system rebranded “LOCAL POLICING TEAMS” which now comprises 1 PC and 1 PCSO dedicated to the ward. Each pair then has as backup a team of 4 Police Constables and 1 Police Sergeant who [are supposed to] police a cluster of EIGHT wards.
From that little back up team however, one will be responsible for what they call “appointments car” whose role it is to attend those calls from the public which are not deemed as urgent and so they are allotted a time when a Police Officer will attend and speak to them regarding whatever it is they felt the need to call the Police about. This may or may not lead to recording crimes but never the less can be a time consuming roll for one Officer.
Another from the group will be responsible for investigating all Crime Reports handed to them at the start of the shift. Making contact with the victim as per the “Victims Code” which requires a Police Officer to make contact on a regular basis agreed to by the victim. Arranging a visit to the victim and/witness to obtain statements, gathering information and evidence perhaps missed out in the intitial report. Again, a very time consuming yet important role.
So that leaves just 2 PCs and a Sgt to patrol the 8 wards, conduct arrest enquiries and any other tasking the Senior Management requires. So in effect the work of the Neighbourhood Police Officer which used to be completed by 2 PCs and 4 PCSO which still caused the public to complain of a low Police presence, has now been chopped down to 1 PC and 1 PCSO!
My source within one such Policing team said
“Combined with the no recruitment for a number of years and the Local Policing team system we’ve just changed to, we feel like we’re drowning under an avalanche!”
External Police recruitment within the Metropolitan Police has been frozen for some time now for both PCs and PCSOs. There is a shortage of PCSOs on many teams due to them becoming PCs and the force not recruiting others to replace them.
Due to the increase in the responsibilities of a PCSO it often means the streets are left un-patrolled. PCSOs walking to calls and enquiries under pressure to get there and complete certain tasks is now the Met’s idea of patrolling.
The Police Community Support Officers are sent to “re-visit” burglary victims and conduct house to house enquiries along the street which itself can take several hours at times. They will also be deployed to make contact with “vulnerable victims” and spend time reassuring them. They have ward and council meetings to attend. Crime prevention leaflets to deliver. Targeted patrols of shopping centres to deter shop lifters and purse dippers. They deal with long term neighbour disputes acting as mediators and go betweens as well as referring people to external partner agencies…. All of this is expected on a daily basis and it does not take a genius to see that there is far too much work for the numbers deployed.
Another source has told me
I’m a dedicated ward PCSO. My work load just gets larger each day. I have to do an analyst’s job with figures for my Inspector as well as dealing with the normal PCSO duties of visiting burglary victims and neighbours and vulnerable victims etc. I stayed nearly two hours late last night doing figures and updating our website… Saying that I often stay an hour or two longer to try and keep up. But it’s never ending!
So where does it end? This isn’t an isolated case. This problem is reflected in almost every single force around the country yet the public are expected to swallow the lies that frontline policing is not being effected by the Governments excessive cuts.
The Police Service of England & Wales is on the verge of collapse. Morale is at the lowest it has EVER been. Numbers are at a 12year low. Crime stats (when reported correctly) are increasing. The public are NOT receiving the same high level of service they once were and still deserve.
Where this ends and what it will take to open the eyes of those in charge, nobody knows.