Best Of

Hmmm..... does anyone else think that the People's Party of Canada have a Trades Description Act issue?

It's almost as bad as having a party wanting to back to the 1950s calling itself Reform.

They want to re-form 1950s Britain.

LOL I stand corrected.

1832, Shirley?

FPT… Police say Allison Pearson is lying and they have the body-worn-video to prove it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev9nxnygzpo

To be fair to the egregious Ms Pearson - I'll believe the police when they publish the footage and it's confirmed by an independent party to be genuine. And not one second before.

It is possible they simply have different slants on the incident.

And it's possible of course that they're all lying.

Has Pearson apologised for labelling people "jew haters", apparently for the crime of having their photo taken while brown?

The PTI have an interesting take on things

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/21/world/pakistan-diplomat-gaza-interview-intl

An unrelated Pakistani saying something antisemitic is pretty poor whataboutery.

The diplomat was a senior PTI member.

The PTI have a history of senior people saying stuff like this.

I’d say that they are a bit of a mirror to Modi in India, in many ways.

Some senior members of the Labour Party have said antisemitic things in the past. Does that make it OK to call anyone supporting Labour a “Jew hater”?

I’d say the PTI is anti-Semitic, in the way that Modi’s party is Islamophobia and the PUP is anti-Catholic.

Anyone waving their banners is not my friend.

FPT… Police say Allison Pearson is lying and they have the body-worn-video to prove it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev9nxnygzpo

To be fair to the egregious Ms Pearson - I'll believe the police when they publish the footage and it's confirmed by an independent party to be genuine. And not one second before.

It is possible they simply have different slants on the incident.

And it's possible of course that they're all lying.

It'll be interesting to see how much of the full encounter the cams caught.

Its not like its a volatile incident happening without notice. It is a meeting with a senior antagonistic journalist at ta time of the police's choosing. There is near zero chance they don't have all of it.

The police won't have mentioned non crime hate crime, they might have mentioned hate crime but more likely public order act 1986 (yes that is how long this has been the status quo). Pearson will think she has committed no crime and is therefore justified in calling it a no crime hate crime.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/18

"A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—

(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or

(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."

As an aside, I have never understood how chanting 'from the river to the sea' does not meet this description. As it seems to be 'threatening, abusive and insulting', and also in my view invokes racial hatred against the Jewish people.

FPT… Police say Allison Pearson is lying and they have the body-worn-video to prove it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev9nxnygzpo

So the police doorstop her on a Sunday morning, ask her about something she posted online more than a year ago, and now accuse her of not having 100% of her facts straight in that doorstop interview?

Reminds me of what the East German Stasi used to do.

Worse than that there is apparently some doubt as to whether she was the Alison Pearson who posted the tweet or whether it was posted by another Alison Pearson. There are about 70 people who have my combination of Christian Name and Surname in the UK, hence I always include my middle name - that reduces the combo to under 5.

Imagine being called Rachel Reeves and being mistaken for a liar who submitted a dishonest CV when applying for a job 15 years ago.

FPT… Police say Allison Pearson is lying and they have the body-worn-video to prove it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev9nxnygzpo

To be fair to the egregious Ms Pearson - I'll believe the police when they publish the footage and it's confirmed by an independent party to be genuine. And not one second before.

It is possible they simply have different slants on the incident.

And it's possible of course that they're all lying.

It'll be interesting to see how much of the full encounter the cams caught.

Its not like its a volatile incident happening without notice. It is a meeting with a senior antagonistic journalist at ta time of the police's choosing. There is near zero chance they don't have all of it.

The police won't have mentioned non crime hate crime, they might have mentioned hate crime but more likely public order act 1986 (yes that is how long this has been the status quo). Pearson will think she has committed no crime and is therefore justified in calling it a no crime hate crime.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/18

"A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—

(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or

(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."

As an aside, I have never understood how chanting 'from the river to the sea' does not meet this description. As it seems to be 'threatening, abusive and insulting', and also in my view invokes racial hatred against the Jewish people.

The 1977 election manifesto of the right-wing Israeli Likud party said: "Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty." Was that invoking racial hatred against the Palestinian people?

The answer to both questions is NO. They are both voicing an aspiration.

FPT… Police say Allison Pearson is lying and they have the body-worn-video to prove it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev9nxnygzpo

To be fair to the egregious Ms Pearson - I'll believe the police when they publish the footage and it's confirmed by an independent party to be genuine. And not one second before.

It is possible they simply have different slants on the incident.

And it's possible of course that they're all lying.

It'll be interesting to see how much of the full encounter the cams caught.

Its not like its a volatile incident happening without notice. It is a meeting with a senior antagonistic journalist at ta time of the police's choosing. There is near zero chance they don't have all of it.

The police won't have mentioned non crime hate crime, they might have mentioned hate crime but more likely public order act 1986 (yes that is how long this has been the status quo). Pearson will think she has committed no crime and is therefore justified in calling it a no crime hate crime.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/18

"A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—

(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or

(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."

As an aside, I have never understood how chanting 'from the river to the sea' does not meet this description. As it seems to be 'threatening, abusive and insulting', and also in my view invokes racial hatred against the Jewish people.

I'm intrigued by your view darkage and tbh I don't think I've ever fully understood the opprobrium chanting 'from the river to the sea' receives.

If someone has a view that the creation of the Isreali state was wrong* and the land should revert to being a Palestinian state is there any legitimate way in which they can protest?

Andy McDonald was suspended from the Labour Party after stating in a pro-Palestine rally speech: "We won't rest until we have justice, until all people, Israelis and Palestinians, between the river and the sea can live in peaceful liberty". The party described McDonald's comment as "deeply offensive".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea#Usage

What's 'deeply offensive' about wishing that 'all people, Israelis and Palestinians, between the river and the sea can live in peaceful liberty'?

(*For the avoidance of doubt, I fully support Isreal's right to exist.)

Hmmm..... does anyone else think that the People's Party of Canada have a Trades Description Act issue?

It's almost as bad as having a party wanting to back to the 1950s calling itself Reform.

They want to re-form 1950s Britain.

LOL I stand corrected.

1832, Shirley?

FPT… Police say Allison Pearson is lying and they have the body-worn-video to prove it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev9nxnygzpo

To be fair to the egregious Ms Pearson - I'll believe the police when they publish the footage and it's confirmed by an independent party to be genuine. And not one second before.

It is possible they simply have different slants on the incident.

And it's possible of course that they're all lying.

Has Pearson apologised for labelling people "jew haters", apparently for the crime of having their photo taken while brown?

The PTI have an interesting take on things

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/21/world/pakistan-diplomat-gaza-interview-intl

An unrelated Pakistani saying something antisemitic is pretty poor whataboutery.

The diplomat was a senior PTI member.

The PTI have a history of senior people saying stuff like this.

I’d say that they are a bit of a mirror to Modi in India, in many ways.

Some senior members of the Labour Party have said antisemitic things in the past. Does that make it OK to call anyone supporting Labour a “Jew hater”?

I’d say the PTI is anti-Semitic, in the way that Modi’s party is Islamophobia and the PUP is anti-Catholic.

Anyone waving their banners is not my friend.

If you think there's some defensible point in publicly calling some brown people jew haters, why do you think Pearson deleted her tweet?