Suella! Braverman!

Unfortunately SKS seems to agree with Cruella and said “the government needed to look at whether there were gaps in the law”.

He’s not really suggesting anything different to anyone else. I mean we’re not even allowed to talk about it on here in case we say something that might upset advertisers or any apologists for ethnic cleansing and genocide. One way or the other those of us who don’t much care for mass slaughter of civilians will be silenced.

He said the law needs looking at. He didn’t suggest the Police should ignore the law and act on a whim, be it their whim or the whim of a politician. So not the same as Braverman at all.

It is worth looking at whether calls for a “Muslim Army” to carry out a “jihad” to achieve the aim of a Palestine “from the river to the sea” is simply free speech, or could depending on the context fall under the definition of hate speech. That would need a change in the law though. Police can’t act, and shouldn’t act, on the wooly interpretation of the current law by the Home Secretary.

It is worth looking at whether calls for a “Muslim Army” to carry out a “jihad” to achieve the aim of a Palestine “from the river to the sea” is simply free speech, or could depending on the context fall under the definition of hate speech. That would need a change in the law though. Police can’t act, and shouldn’t act, on the wooly interpretation of the current law by the Home Secretary.

Early this year I sat on the jury of a white supremacist where one of the charges he faced was making similar calls (but on the internet) for white people to embark on a war to kill all Muslims and Jews. He was found guilty and jailed.

Whilst the term ‘jihad’ may have many meanings, the case I was on showed that with use of this kind of language by anyone, it’s all about the context in which it is used. And I’ll be honest, I struggle to believe someone chanting it at these protests means it in any sort of fluffy, light, and friendly way.

They had a lawyer on Radio 4 this morning saying that there are proposals to firm up the law in this area, but it all falls down when you have to actually legally define words like ‘extremist’ and other loaded terms

Like so many other things, these proposals have been sat gathering dust in the Home secretaries inbox for years now

I’m not surprised that the police gave her such short shrift

Whilst the term ‘jihad’ may have many meanings, the case I was on showed that with use of this kind of language by anyone, it’s all about the context in which it is used.

Presumably in that case they had explicitly called for the killing of entire groups of people, rather than used language that could be interpreted (and meant) in a different way.

Exactly. She makes a fuss on the news. A bunch of the swivel eyed brigade think she’s doing a good thing, and the police continue doing what they think is best in the very difficult circumstances, ie not turning a protest into a riot.

Radio 4 this morning had a couple of good guests who neatly explained that the black flag with white writing is actually the statement of the Islamic faith ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahada ) and that jihad is merely the struggle ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad ) as a person of faith – both have simply been hijacked by terrorist organisations.

Sadly so many people will not be listening to Radio 4 discussion from experts and will read a Daily Wail or BBC headline.

She really is just keen on how the polls look – and I also think that a bit like Liz Truss, she has been promoted beyond her ability and intellect.

Yesterday afternoon I went to a packed meeting at my local mosque called to express solidarity with the Palestinian people.

Chris Philp (my local MP) was specifically invited to attend, in fact it was billed as the Muslim community’s opportunity to express their opinions of the situation in Palestine to their local MP (a very small handful of non-muslims like myself also attended)

About five speakers spoke first, denouncing Israel and the UK government’s support for it.

The last speaker was Chris Philp who said that he had come to listen not to speak, although he did for a short while.

To my annoyance despite the potential for a fairly hostile audience Philp did remarkably well and it was definitely a win for him. He kicked off things by impressively greeting them all in Arabic, to which they all responded back in Arabic. He then proceeded to tell them about his travels to the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza. He remembered previous speakers Arabic names and repeatedly received applause from the audience. He “promised” to convey their views to the Cabinet.

Fortunately for Philp the press wasn’t present, or perhaps that was his condition for attending?. But if the press had been there and it was being reported by the media that the Tory policing minister (that’s what Philp is) was a guest at a Muslim meeting hostile to Israel, would Suella Braverman be asking Rishi Sunak to sack him?

Probably not judging by the heightened level of political hypocrisy these days. No doubt if it had been the shadow policing minister, or god forbid a leftie Corbynite MP, Braverman, (and no doubt also Starmer) would have gone into meltdown.

both have simply been hijacked by terrorist organisations.

That’s a bit of a sunshiney spin on it.

and I also think that a bit like Liz Truss, she has been promoted beyond her ability and intellect.

I think we’d have hit that point if they’d just asked her to watch everybody’s coats

Like this entire pathetic government, they are in their cabinet positions purely due to whichever faction of the Tory party presently has the upper hand. Rishi is a fully paid up right wing headbanger but he gets to smile at the camera’s and leave Cruella to sort his dirty work. A job she relishes, while also coveting his

That’s a bit of a sunshiney spin on it.

The shahada, which is what Braverman specifically wants banned, is simply a declaration of faith, it has nothing whatsoever to do with violence.

She does?

Anyway, the Met are on the ball with this:

https://x.com/metpoliceuk/status/1715787302637646321?s=20

It is used by terrorist groups, but absolutely has a peaceful and benign meaning as well (think use of St George’s Cross by banned hate groups… it hasn’t led to banning the use of that flag).

[ sorry for X link, I can’t find this Met stuff elsewhere ]

To my annoyance despite the potential for a fairly hostile audience Philp did remarkably well and it was definitely a win for him.

Must admit I am staggered that he would show up for this. Seems to carry an immense risk, media or no media, in today’s febrile political atmosphere. What’s his majority like?

What’s his majority like?

Under normal circumstances very comfortable, but not so comfortable under the present political climate:

New poll suggests Tories would lose almost all London MPs at general election

“and policing minister Chris Philp (Croydon South) would be among the Tories in the capital to lose their House of Commons seats.”

10.4% of Croydon’s population is Muslim. They are having problems building another mosque in Phip’s constituency concerning planning application, he is helping them with that.

Edit: I have been told that the two Labour MPs in Croydon were also invited but declined (neither of them stand any chance of losing their seats) but I would want that confirmed as I am not sure why they would be invited to a mosque in another constituency when they have mosques in their own constituencies.

Whilst at the mosque I spoke to someone about their cycling club, I was told that I was welcomed to ride with them. So I might find out more on my next bike ride!

I expect we’ll see a lot of Tory MPs suddenly become very interested in meeting their constituents as often as possible.

I expect we’ll see a lot of Tory MPs suddenly become very interested in meeting their constituents as often as possible.

Funny you should mention that. We all just got a letter/leaflet to say that our Tory MP (majority 100 votes) is now going to be holding regular local surgeries to see if he can deal with any of his constituents problems.

Which is nice, as its the first time anyone round here has heard a peep from the ****er since he was elected in 2019. We occasionally see him being quite shouty in the houses of parliament about immigration or something Brexity. John Crace in the Guardian described him as ‘permanently angry about something or other’. Well, we’re all planning on giving him something to be ****ing angry about….. his impending unemployment 😃

If I was one of them, I wouldn’t even bother putting in the effort unless I had at least a 10K majority to defend, or Labour HQ had put forward someone objectionable to my err…single issue voters.

And on the other team, to paraphrase Joe Biden, no Labour MP is likely to lose their seat, other than because of boundary changes. So don’t expect too much effort from them.

John Crace in the Guardian described him as ‘permanently angry about something or other’.

<without comment>

I expect we’ll see a lot of Tory MPs suddenly become very interested in meeting their constituents as often as possible.

…aye, and their Jobcentre Plus case workers.

(Are they still called that?)

It turns out that Tory policing minister’s attendance at a meeting where Israel was repeatedly criticised by pro-Palestinian Muslims, and the Palestinian flag was on display, has now been covered by the local press:

Only one Croydon MP attended mosques’ emergency meetings

I wonder if Suella Braverman will condemn the Tory policing minister for attending an anti-semitic event. I suspect not.

Croydon’s population is 10.4% Muslim so the adults within that represent a slice of the electorate that Philp can’t really afford to ignore.
That may have some bearing on his attendance at the meeting and helping with the planning application for a mosque.
It’s impossible to know if he would have acted differently if there were a far smaller number of Muslims in his constituency – say 2% or 5%.
Having said that, it’s good that he attended and that his attendance has now been reported by local media; would be even better if it received some coverage in the national media.

To be fair most of the Muslim community in Croydon will be living in the Labour north of the borough, not the more prosperous south which Philp represents.

Still, in the unlikely event that he does lose his seat in the next general election it will definitely be by only a handful of votes, so every vote will be important to him.

I have no doubt that was on Philp’s mind when he agreed to attend the meeting, he had little to lose from doing so – Croydon’s Jewish community is tiny, 0.20%, most no doubt secular and not necessarily as committed to one side as the Muslim community are. The only Jew that I personally know in South Croydon is a Labour Party member and very strong supporter of Corbyn.

I have been on a guided visit of the synagogue in Croydon and I got the impression that the synagogue was supported, including financially, mostly by one or two families.

They were clearly grateful and very respectful at the mosque meeting that Philp had made the effort to attend. Greeting them in Arabic and remembering the Arabic names of the previous speakers was impressive, as was his very careful chosen words.

But I got the impression that this was an extremely well-informed audience who wasn’t going to forget that the Tories are no friends of the Palestinian people, and that the Tory Home Secretary is an islamophobic bigot.

So I doubt that the meeting resulted in any significant benefit for Philp beyond giving him the opportunity to practice his Arabic pronunciations.

To my annoyance despite the potential for a fairly hostile audience Philp did remarkably well

Heard him on 5Live yesterday in connection with something else and he didn’t come across as being a Tory minister

Well Chris Philp is somewhat at odds with his party leadership on this one.

Lil Rishi and Cruella are both going all-in and having a bit of a law’n’orda competition with each other about who can give the most vocal denunciations of one bloke stood in the street saying a word

Am I just being cynical or does anyone else suspect we’re about to get some draconian cobbled-together clampdown on the right to protest, under the thin guise of combatting ‘hatespeech’?

Either that or it’s just the usual macho posturing for the benefit of the Daily Mail and all part of Cruellas ongoing leadership campaign

Am I just being cynical or does anyone else suspect we’re about to get some draconian cobbled-together clampdown on the right to protest

Looking like it.  And Starmer will be able to just keep it in place as it is okay saying everyone has the right to protest until they are protesting about what you are doing when in government…

I’m not up to speed on the exact wording of the laws but I gather from reports that inciting hatred/terrorism is a bit woolly and still allows some behaviour that seems to cross the free speech line.

However, I don’t doubt this government’s ability to use that as an opportunity to tighten up on what should be lawful protest.

They’re great these libertarians aren’t they? Championing the right of the individual to do whatever they like, right up to the point where anyone wants do do or say something they don’t agree with.

Its coming to something when the Metropolitan Police are the voice of restraint and moderation in any situation, but thats the point we appear to have now arrived at with this shambles of a government

Interesting what you say about Phelps, as on TV/radio all I’ve ever seen is a man parroting whatever it is he’s been told to parrot – is he someone that dies a little inside each time he does or just a shameless actor that doesn’t GAS?

I’m not up to speed on the exact wording of the laws but I gather from reports that inciting hatred/terrorism is a bit woolly and still allows some behaviour that seems to cross the free speech line.

A lawyer on Radio 4 yesterday was saying that defining terms such as ‘extremist’ in law is virtually impossible as its so subjective. I doubt that’ll stop Cruella rushing through some dogs dinner of a law which will be predominantly aimed at clamping down on ALL protests, regardless of any possible incitement to hatred/terrorism

Am I just being cynical or does anyone else suspect we’re about to get some draconian cobbled-together clampdown on the right to protest, under the thin guise of combatting ‘hatespeech’?

I think they will prefer to play the victim. Unable to lock people up because of the woke police and the deep state.

A lawyer on Radio 4 yesterday was saying that defining terms such as ‘extremist’ in law is virtually impossible as its so subjective

And another high profile lawyer, Suella Braverman, embraces extremism with open arms so that she can whip up hatred against an ethnic group.

The Home Secretary falsely wrote that perpetrators of child sexual exploitation were “almost all British-Pakistani”.

https://pressgazette.co.uk/the-wire/newspaper-corrections-media-mistakes-errors-legal/mail-on-sunday-suella-braverman-home-secretary-grooming-gangs/

The Daily Mail’s defence, which was accepted by the press regulator, was that they were entitled to believe the claim as Suella Braverman is the Home Secretary.

Suella Braverman however was deliberately lying:

In fact Home Office research from 2020 found that offenders of child sexual exploitation were “most commonly white” and there is no proven link between ethnicity and this type of offending.

There is little doubt that deliberately and publicly lying to attack an ethic group is a hate crime, only a Home Secretary could get away with it.

And in this case a Home Secretary who throws around allegations of “hate crimes” every time there is public opposition to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

Can she get any lower……….

How many times have we said that?

Remember those innocent care-free days when we thought Priti Patel was about as bad as it could get as far as Home Secretary’s were concerned?

I have a horrible feeling that as the inevitable general election defeat looms – and so the (somewhat pointless) race to succeed Rishi as leader of the opposition intensifies – she’ll just get nastier and nastier.

As the debacle of the Liz Truss premiership demonstrated, there is only one audience being played to here… a tiny band of horrible old bigots

Can she get any lower……….

Of course she can!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67321319

“living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.”

She really is despicable…………….

“many of them from abroad”

Desperately chasing the anti-foreigner vote that has made her career what it is.

Apparently living in tents is a lifestyle choice – FFS. I’m sure most tent dwellers would prefer the comfort and safety of a proper house, but due the complete failure of the Tory Government over the last 13 years to meet their house building targets, many people are being forced into such living arrangements. I wonder what’s next on Cruella’s list to target to pamper to her far right supporters.

the complete failure of the Tory Government over the last 13 years to meet their house building targets

Not letting the government off at all, but..
From experience on new estates in my village and another thread, the building companies need to shoulder some of that blame by closing down projects as soon as the profit margin drops slightly.

Back on topic I heard this in passing on the radio and thought it was some loony trying to grab some air time.
Kind of right….

Can she get any lower……….

lower than vermin.

Even my MrsMC lost it when she saw that comment – they are on tne streets due to 13 years of Tory failures, whether tneyvome from home or abroad.

She’s just lashing out with these tantrums, and she’s incredibly dangerous as a result.

The vile bitch is, yet again, spouting poison.
If she bothered talking with any of the homelessness charities to begin informing herself about homelessness – what is it, why does it exist, what are the pathways out of it, how much funding homeless charities need to make an appreciable difference, how integrated (or not) are the various social services in their approach to managing homelessness to use only a few examples – she might be in a position to comment meaningfully.

There are many ex-homeless people who now work for the charities which helped them so here’s a radical suggestion for her – go and talk to some of them for a true ‘insider view’.

Some homeless charities are reluctant to accept central gov funding as it exposes them to political interference and attempts to direct their approach.
I have no doubt braverman would love to direct how such charities could operate.

Governments regard homelessness as something they cannot manage so put it in the ‘too hard to do’ box and keep it there.

Most, if not all, homeless charities have a high level of dependance on volunteer support which, outside of the charities themselves, is barely acknowledged or recognised.

I’m not an expert on the subject but have some understanding based on 15 years of volunteering with two charities and attending focussed training courses.