EXCLUSIVE Policeman defends teenager telling pro-Israel supporters that 'Jews kill children' and says it is 'in the same vein as displaying sign calling Hamas rapists'
A pro-Israel campaigner was left stunned when a police officer explained that saying 'Jews are baby killers' was 'in the same vein' as holding a placard stating ' Hamas are rapists'.
The visibly shocked man was provided with that answer during a vigil in Brighton, East Sussex, which was held on Saturday to remember victims of the October 7 Hamas attacks in Israel, as well as the 55 hostages that remain in Gaza.
Campaign group Sussex Friends of Israel, which has shared footage of the incident on social media, tonight accused Sussex Police of 'downplaying' antisemitism after the officer 'disagreed' that the evocative words amounted to racial incitement.
The incident was sparked after a group of youths allegedly heckled vigil participants by saying 'Jews are baby killers'.
As seen on the footage, one of the pro-Israel supporters approached a police officer to complain.
He tells the officer: 'This man has just said that Jews kill children. That is a racially aggravated barb intended to incite hatred.
'I wanted to stress [that by saying that] he intends harm to me and other Jews.'
The officer then responded that while he had heard the comment, people were allowed to 'express views'.
He explained: 'I heard him say that, I'm not going to disagree that he didn't say it, but we are in a public forum where people can express views.
'I disagree that its a racially aggravated remark and at the same time there was a sign up there not too long ago saying 'Hamas Are Rapists', which I would suggest is in the same vein as the argument you have just made.'
A second campaigner then stepped forward to say that he 'takes a great objection' to what the officer has just told them.
'Think about this for a second. 'Jews are baby killers' is in the same vein as stating 'Hamas are rapists'. Think about it,' he urges the officer.
The officer responds: 'I'm simply saying that the tone of the messages that are used are very similar.
'I'm not going to get into an argument with you in the street...[they are] simply expressing their views in relative calmness.
'If they are going to start causing issues, we will be there to prevent them from doing that.
'But while we are having an argument and a simple back and forth discussion on the street we're not going to get anywhere are we?'
The vigil participant however disagrees.
He tells him: 'Jews are an ethnicity, Hamas are a proscribed terrorist organisation. Having a poster saying 'Hamas Are Rapists' is not in the same vein as saying 'Jews are baby killers.' There's no similarity whatsoever.'
The officer shakes his head and tells the men: 'We will agree to disagree on that aspect.'
He then asks the pair to return to the rest of the group 'to stop an unnecessary escalation.'
One of the men however tells the officer: 'If they come and heckle us we have a right to respond.'
In a post on X tonight, Sussex Friends of Israel accused Sussex Police of making a 'shocking false equivalence'.
The group said: 'At today's peaceful rally in support of Israel, held to remember the hostages murdered and taken on October 7th, we were confronted by a group of masked, aggressive youths shouting antisemitic slurs, including 'Jews are baby killers.'
'When we raised this with the police, the liaison sergeant in charge refused to recognise the comment as racially aggravated.
In a post on X tonight, Sussex Friends of Israel accused Sussex Police of making a 'shocking false equivalence'.
'Incredibly, he claimed it was 'in the same vein' as our placard stating 'Hamas are rapists.'
'This shocking false equivalence not only downplays vile antisemitism, but shows a complete failure by the police to uphold their duty throughout the event.'
Tonight antisemitism campaigners told MailOnline the officer had seemingly failed to 'tell the difference between a minority and a terrorist organisation' and described the incident as 'appalling'.
Stephen Silverman, director of Investigations and Enforcement at Campaign Against Antisemitism, said: 'Britain has descended to a place where police officers cannot tell the difference between incitement against a minority that they are supposed to be protecting and a proscribed terrorist organisation that they are supposed to be defending our country against.
'This embarrassing, pathetic excuse for policing is the product of the appeasement of extremists and racists that our police have engaged in since 'Free Palestine' thugs first started shouting abuse and mobbing our streets 20 months ago.
'Sussex Police need to apologise for this appalling incident and find the perpetrator who had been right under their officers' noses, but more importantly the Government needs to take charge and tell our police forces to get a grip.
'When police can't tell the difference between a minority and a terrorist organisation, it's not just demoralising, it's actually dangerous.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
19 minutes ago
- BBC News
Dating app scam victims told 'don't suffer in silence'
Students are being urged not to suffer in silence when targeted by scams on dating apps, as investigators see blackmail cases teams at Nationwide, the UK's biggest building society, said trusted friends could help potential victims avoid sending private or intimate images during new online relationships. Anyone who has been scammed should report cases to the authorities, they student in Cardiff told the BBC how a drink in the pub had alerted them to the risk of a friend being tricked by fraudsters using AI year, the National Crime Agency (NCA) put out its first ever all-school alert, warning teenagers about the dangers of sextortion. Blackmail warning Sextortion is when criminals pose as young people online, trick a victim into sending sexually explicit material, and then blackmail Burksys, head of fraud operations at Nationwide, said that scammers were "efficient and unrelenting". As a result, these kinds of scams were "commonplace" among on such crimes is difficult to gather, as they are recorded in different ways or are never reported at all. A survey by Nationwide suggested 28% of students asked had been scammed, and 50% of students worried about becoming a year, BBC News sent a Freedom of Information request to every police force in the UK, asking how many reported blackmail offences featured the word "sextortion" over the last 33 forces (out of a total of 45) who responded recorded almost 8,000 blackmail cases logged with a reference to sextortion in 2023. The same number of forces recorded just 23 in 2014. All the forces to respond were in England and Wales. 'You're talking to a bot' On a night out with friends, Emma Evans, a student in Cardiff, was chatting to one of them about his chats on dating suggested the group look through some of the conversations, but one "particularly attractive and particularly keen" match raised alarm bells."We looked at this chat and the thing that gave it away was that this person was saying the same words over and over again," Emma told BBC Radio 4's You and Yours."For example, he kept on saying how he wanted to find someone who is really passionate over and over again, and he wasn't really answering my friend's questions."The group pointed out to their friend that the language seemed to be the speech patterns of an AI chatbot. Talk to a friend Jim Winters, head of economic crime at Nationwide, urged people not to overshare images, particularly with someone they had never met."Blackmail is one of the hardest things to face and it's happening more often. It's not easy but if something doesn't feel right, speak up," he said. "It might be tempting in the moment to share information or photos but once shared, you will never have control over it again."He has the following tips:Look out for odd phrases in messages and conversations that do not relate to what you have writtenPut any profile photos into a search engine and see if they have been used elsewhere, and are stock imagesIf you are unsure about a situation, show the messages to someone else for a second opinion before things go too farAnyone who is being blackmailed should report their case to the authorities, for help and support"Talk to someone you trust, maybe a friend or family member. Don't suffer in silence," he said. Exploiting grief As well as targeting young people near the start of their lives, fraudsters have been stepping up their attempts to trick the friends and family of people who have exploit the grief of bereaved families by impersonating them online and charging mourners to see funeral livestreams that should be free, according to the Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI) which supports businesses and local authorities' trading standards livestreams became more popular during lockdown, and have continued since for those who struggle to attend a funeral in contact mourners with bogus links to watch a funeral and demand payment, or set up fake donation pages on legitimate Hart, CTSI lead officer for doorstep crime, said: "This is a truly despicable scam – targeting people during one of the most emotionally difficult moments of their lives. "It's hard to imagine a more callous form of fraud. What's particularly upsetting is that victims often feel they can't report what's happened for fear of adding further stress to grieving families. "That silence is exactly what these criminals are counting on. We need people to stay vigilant, share warnings and report anything suspicious."
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Fast-track suicide if you pay extra, discount deals for couples and you don't even have to be terminally ill: Inside Germany's morally queasy approach to assisted dying where business is booming for the pedlars of euthanasia
Last week, the UK's highest elected officials ruled on the most existential of questions: how we choose to die. At its third reading, the Assisted Dying Bill passed the Commons by a slim majority of 23 votes, and now its fate lies with the Lords, where it faces a bumpy ride before it becomes law. The upper chamber, for instance, will examine if a three-person panel of professionals (from law, psychiatry and social work) offers greater safety and oversight in approving a patient's application to die than a High Court judge, as was originally proposed. Peers will have at their disposal the grim cost-benefit analysis to the NHS in accelerating the deaths of the terminally ill, released last month under the cover of the local election results. According to the report, as many as 1,300 people are expected to apply to die in the first year, saving as much as £10million in medical bills. But can the health service cope with this demand, especially as NHS staff will be offered an opt-out from the ugly business of state-sponsored suicide? No doubt private health providers are already bending the ears of peers for a slice of the death industry pie. It would be tempting to allow private enterprise to take some of the strain, but I urge the Lords to look at how business seized the opportunity with morally queasy gusto in my native land, Germany, where some firms offer a 'fast track' service for people who can pay more and even special discounts to couples wishing to hasten their demise. Pictured: Pedestrians walk past the posters promoting the Assisted Dying bill at Westminster Underground station In Germany, anyone 18 or over can lawfully commit suicide with the help of a third party. Yes, anyone. There is no requirement for the person to be six months from death, nor is there any specification over having a life-limiting or debilitating illness (as in the UK Bill). A perfectly healthy university student can seek help to kill themselves for no better reason than they are fed up with life. Hannelore Kring, 83, is typical of Germany's liberal approach to assisted suicide. A recording of her death featured in a podcast by news broadcaster WDR and it is a spine-chilling reminder of how relaxed my countrymen are about dying. At an undertaker's, Frau Kring is accompanied by two 'death helpers' – a nurse and retired teacher – and sounds relieved her life will end in a matter of minutes. Dressed in black and with make-up, as if attending a party, she suggests a dance with the nurse. Indeed, she is not ill, she is as healthy as anyone in their 80s. She has run a second-hand men's boutique in Hamburg but feels life's no longer worth living. She's lonely, all her friends have died and the state of the world depresses her. The helpers ask if she really wants to go through with it. 'Absolutely!' she replies enthusiastically. The nurse hooks her up to an infusion of a lethal dose of narcotics – a 'suicide cocktail'. She merely has to turn a valve, letting the toxic chemicals enter her bloodstream, putting her to sleep for ever. It's important she takes the final step herself, otherwise the helpers could be charged with manslaughter. Assisted suicides like this have been fully legal in Germany since 2020, although legislation has been a generation in the making. After the Second World War the subject was largely taboo, in no small part due to revulsion at the Nazis' Aktion T4 programme, which entailed the 'mercy killing' of 300,000 disabled people. By the 1970s and 1980s, a push for more patient autonomy led to court decisions in 1984 and 1990 that ensured suffering, bed-ridden people had the right to stop treatments that prolonged their lives. With the 2009 Patient Directive Law, people could include such instructions in a living will if they became incapacitated. This gave legal protections to doctors offering assisted suicide. But then the public grew uneasy at what seemed a creeping commercialisation of the right to die. Healthcare is not free at the point of use in Germany, so the nation is more comfortable than the UK with private provision within the system. But only up to a point. Many were appalled in 2014 when a Berlin urologist Uwe-Christian Arnold revealed he had helped 'several hundred people' take their lives since the late 1990s for fees of up to €10,000. Christian groups accused him of undermining the sanctity of life. The German Medical Association threatened him with a €50,000 fine, saying doctors should prolong life, not give their patients lethal poisons. Arnold took them to court over the fine and won. Also in 2014, a right-to-die association in Hamburg caused uproar for offering fast-track assisted suicide consultations in exchange for higher membership fees. Its normal rate was €2,000, with a waiting time of a year, but it introduced a jump-the-queue service for €7,000. Other providers offered discounts for couples interested in dying together. These were grisly bargains that lead many to regard Germany as a Las Vegas of suicide, which was anathema to a country that saw itself as otherwise Christian and conservative. Church groups took to Berlin's streets as legislators sought to crack down on the industry. Arnold and others passionately defended their businesses. The 'death helpers' argued the issue was comparable to abortion: a ban would be unfair to the terminally ill, who shouldn't have to travel to places like Switzerland to end their lives with dignity. The debate ended with parliament banning 'commercial' assisted suicide under Chancellor Angela Merkel in 2015. Subsequently, only friends and relatives who received no money for their assistance could help someone end their life. Legal challenges were launched by right-to-die advocates and people suffering terminal illnesses. In a 2020 judgement, the Constitutional Court said the freedoms enshrined in the country's post-war constitution meant 'the decision to take one's own life must be respected by the state as an act of personal autonomy'. Those who had been put out of work by the previous ruling were free to ply their trade once again. Five years after that decision, it feels like we're back to the Wild West of pre-2015. Assisted suicide in Germany is an unregulated free-for-all. A slew of undertakers, lawyers and independent doctors are facilitating a rising toll of assisted deaths. Last year it was about 1,000, though no one is keeping exact figures. Likewise there's no central registry of providers. Nearly anyone can set up shop. The largest player in the business is the German Association for Humane Dying (DGHS), which charges €4,000 a suicide but offers a discounted €6,000 for couples. It says that of the 623 people for whom it arranged suicide last year (it forwards requests to independent teams of doctors and lawyers), 22 per cent were just 'fed up with life'. Two-thirds were female. DGHS spokesperson Wega Wetzel says: 'Women are more likely to be widowed and 'left over' than men. Women are more likely to plan and communicate, while men often choose 'hard' suicide methods such as hanging.' Equally worrying is the fact that nothing prevents young people from choosing the path of assisted suicide. The youngest case I heard of was a 21-year-old man. The only requirement spelled out by the court was that the person be 'freely responsible' for their decision. At least DGHS, to maintain its reputation, has doctors and lawyers screen applicants to ensure they understand what they're getting into, that they're not being coerced and that they do not show symptoms of mental illness or dementia. But nobody knows how many independent providers are making money with assisted suicide. Nobody knows how they are screening clients, particularly in the more affordable services where standards may be lower. A study last month in the British Medical Journal analysed 77 assisted suicides in Munich. It found that one patient's consultation with a clinic lasted 55 minutes and the death was booked for the next day. The assisting physician in another case was a relative of the patient. In a 2022 case, the suicidal person was judged of sound mind based on a five-year-old mental capacity evaluation. But there is still broad support for the right to die: 80 per cent of Germans feel it's appropriate for the critically ill. But just 30 per cent say it should be available to people with a long life ahead of them, and only 3 per cent for young people having a crisis. Ute Lewitzska, professor for suicide studies at Frankfurt University, sees a fundamental change in how we deal with growing old. 'Supply creates demand,' she says. 'The 2020 court decision didn't just open a crack in the door, it flung the door wide open – and we're not going to be able to close that door again.' The fear is a normalisation of assisted suicide. For some it's a humane way to end one's life; for others it's an easy solution to suffering that's being oversold. Dr Lukas Radbruch, director of palliative care at University Clinic Bonn, has worked with end-of-life patients for three decades. He says many more now ask about assisted suicide but 'so many people are not sufficiently informed. Or we have doubts about how voluntary their choice is. Or we realise they still want to live, even if they say they want to die.' Sometimes a suicidal person needs counselling, not the means to kill themselves. Where do you draw the line? Dr Radbruch asks. In 2023 the German parliament tried to hammer out rules to provide clearer guidance, but MPs couldn't reach a consensus. Like many in the West, Germany seems destined to grope its way through this ethical minefield with no transparent way forward that is satisfactory for all. I do not envy the task ahead for Britain's Lords. My country's experience offers a salutary lesson that for the Bill to become law, they must make black and white what is a painfully grey issue.
BBC News
24 minutes ago
- BBC News
Give new recruits £10,000 to join army, says Sir Ed Davey
New soldiers should be offered a £10,000 bonus to rapidly boost troop numbers to deal with an increasingly unpredictable world, the Lib Dems have government should also distribute pamphlets to make sure every British home is "war-ready" and able to deal with blackouts and chaos caused by the outbreak of conflict or cyber-attacks, Lib Dem Leader Sir Ed Davey Lib Dems claim the plans will "urgently" boost to the number of trained soldiers from just under 71,000 to more than 73, the face of a "barbaric" Russian President Vladimir Putin and an "erratic" US President Donald Trump, Sir Ed said the UK must be better prepared. Over the weekend, Sir Ed visited Estonia to see British troops on what he called Nato's "frontline with Russia".His visit had shown him "it is clear given the threat of a barbaric Putin and the challenge of an erratic Trump, we need to do more to make Britain war-ready," he said."War readiness also starts at home," Sir Ed added, "which is why I am calling for a public awareness campaign aimed at every home in Britain - to make sure we're all prepared for the possibility of a conflict or hostile acts such as major cyber-attacks".Under the plans, new recruits receive a £10,000 bonus after completing training and serving for two armed services personnel would be offered a £20,000 payment if they return to serve two additional starting salary for new recruits to the British Army is £26,334 a a government scheme launched last November, a total of 17,000 armed forces personnel became eligible for retention engineers can get £30,000 if they sign up for a further three years, with privates and lance corporals eligible for £8,000 for four proposed Lib Dem scheme would be limited to 3,000 personnel, including new recruits and re-enlistees, with its £60m cost covered by the main defence plans are drawn up with the expectation that defence spending would rise to 2.5% of national income or GDP by 2027 - as promised by Lib Dems have called for the uplift in defence spending to be funded through an increase of the Digital Services Tax - a 2% levy on the biggest social media and tech companies, which raises about £800m a Lib Dems argue the bonus scheme would "urgently increase" the number of trained UK regular soldiers up to 73,000 - from the 70,752 listed in the most recent official month, the government set out plans for a small increase to the size of the regular army to 76,000 full-time soldiers after 2029 - although this has yet to be has also proposed a 20% increase in Active Reserves "when funding allows" - most likely after 2030 following an overhaul of the armed forces. The government is consulting on plans to regenerate military homes with £7bn of funding by 2025, after bringing the defence estate back under Ministry of Defence (MoD) control last Conservatives have called for an increase in UK troop numbers but have not set out how many they think are week, the shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge set out plans to have military homes run by a housing association to tackle the "poor" state of accommodation and stem an exodus of a third of UK troops were considering leaving the armed forces due to the standard of accommodation, the Ministry of Defence's (MoD) own survey found. Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
