Another appalling attack

Wyllow3 'understand the context'???? it is like you are giving justification!!!!???? I am sickened by your comment!

Wyllow3 'By all means continue to cry'!!!!!????? what an absolutely disgusting dreadful comment.

Oreo

A good start would be banning any hate marches by any group.

On R4 last night there was a discussion on the upcoming protests in London and its management. Including interviews with Jewish people who both think they should be banned, and those who join the protests because although they support the existence of an Israeli State wholeheartedly, they do not agree with what the current regime is doing. Also interview with the police.

The police cannot ban any lawful protest it is a precious right we hold as citizens in the UK, and the parlous state of people in Gaza or those who are using homes and land on the West Bank needs bringing to people's attention, which has been swept away by Trumps actions in Iran and of course actions Netanyahu has taken in Lebanon.

The police are discussing whether the protests should be contained (ie static, not marching) and I think all decent people agree including the Jewish contingent on the march of course, should and will cull any hate banners or chanting of same.

That's the way ahead, not removing hard fought for democratic rights to protest.

The progressives will be the end of us.

Caleo

HummusAndToast

I would just like to chime in and remind everyone that the entire Israeli-Palestine conflict began precisely on October 7th, when Hamas unprovokedly attacked poor innocent Israel for no good reason whatsoever.

Carry on.

Hamas had reason but insufficient reason for its violent reprisal. West Bank settlers had continuously stolen land and water supplies from Palestinian neighbours , ever since Israel was established.

HummusAndToast....

If you had read previous threads which included discussing the history of the conflict in the Palestine area, ie the roots of what happened in October 7th:

Or even just checked online as to the history of "who should be able to live there and how" - it goes back to before Balfour on November 2, 1917, who as part of a WW1 deal promised people a Jewish Homeland in the area in a declaration letter. Which happened in 1948.

The conflict continued through the 1930's between Jewish people in the region and the Palestinian peoples as refugees continued to pour in: both sides had terrorist groups the founding of the Israeli State - (but not an equivalent Palestinian one to give necessary status and draw sufficient boundaries)

The displacement of many Palestinians in the Al-Nakba which meant during 1947–1949 period, an estimated 700,000 to 750,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes or fled out of fear. Over 500 Palestinian villages and towns were destroyed or depopulated.

A significant moment in time was the June 1967 Six-Day War, a pivotal struggle over land, security, and existence, resulting in Israel occupying the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai, and Golan Heights. Since then the key issue has been Israeli expansionism.

The conflict has always been there. This is not to condone any actions taken but it most certainly didn't "begin" on that October day,

and both sides have done some dreadful things

The current state for the people in Gaza is such that people living in tents stay awake all night watching their children because of the rats actually biting them, the disease, lack of santitation, opportunities to make a living and so on.

The history is devastating: heart wrenching, for of course the holocaust was perhaps the most horrifying event in 20th century history and Jewish people had a need and right for a homeland, but the cost?

Extremists on both sides want to occupy the whole of the area "just for them" and the current Israeli regime is acting on this premise in the West Bank as well as Gaza.

By all means continue to cry out about October 7th: but understand the context .

I sometimes think it can be the young who have the more intransigent views. From what I read, when the Pakistani communities first settled here back in the '70s, they worked hard in carpet factories and didn't hold the extreme and often divisive views that would set them apart from their younger people. Acts of terrorism have generally been committed by young individuals. If, as Oreo has stated, quite a significant number of the younger generation per se, think the Holocaust didn't happen, then the "good" modern education has not only failed them but can only be as good as whoever is instructing them and hopefully doing it in such a way without any personal bias.

He wasn’t just a Muslim walking along the street, he was well known to the attacker, who is also Muslim.
It doesn’t change a thing.
As for hiding any type of religious clothing, let’s not go down that route.
Christians wearing a cross? Nuns ? As well as Muslim women wearing a hijab.
Let’s get this present high level amount of antisemitism dealt with!

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Franbern

Seems strange how the press and tv ignored the fact that this person actually attacked THREE people (not just the two reported). The first victim was a Muslim, so obviously did not fit the scenario of terrorist anti-semitism that has been headlines.

It does appear that these attacks are the result of a mental health issue and perhaps instead of that money going to policing, it should go to the local mental health team to try to prevent further problems.

I didn't even know that, Franbern. that the first person was a Muslim.
Frankly it's clear we need resources for both adequate policing and most definitely in Mental Health..

Iam64

Why should religious people be expected to hide their faith.. isn’t the point that we need to find better ways to prevent prejudice and bigotry. And improve mental health services

Wearing ordinary everyday clothing is not "hiding your faith".

It'd bad taste to dress ostentatiously for any reason at all, including political beliefs, religious beliefs, social class, display of wealth, or overt display of sexual attractions.

TerriBull

Well that's the French way, particularly in schools, no visible signs of religious symbolism. I'm not sure that's taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut and I think that approach would stir up even greater discontent, it's such a blanket approach to cultural identity , Sikhs and turbans for example, that are a crucial part of their beliefs.

I don't recommend that it be a crime to wear ostentatious religious apparel. In fact, I believe that in line with good modern education of the younger generations , the influence of intransigent elders will fade away.

The softly softly approach to Muslim extremism in this country hasn’t worked and has led to what we now have.Things will need to change starting right now with banning or corralling the usual hate marches that have gone virtually unchecked for several years.

HummusAndToast

I would just like to chime in and remind everyone that the entire Israeli-Palestine conflict began precisely on October 7th, when Hamas unprovokedly attacked poor innocent Israel for no good reason whatsoever.

Carry on.

Hamas had reason but insufficient reason for its violent reprisal. West Bank settlers had continuously stolen land and water supplies from Palestinian neighbours , ever since Israel was established.

Franbern

Seems strange how the press and tv ignored the fact that this person actually attacked THREE people (not just the two reported). The first victim was a Muslim, so obviously did not fit the scenario of terrorist anti-semitism that has been headlines.

It does appear that these attacks are the result of a mental health issue and perhaps instead of that money going to policing, it should go to the local mental health team to try to prevent further problems.

It was reported.
This man was known to have been helped for MH problems and had been reported to the Prevent team, more than once.
He does, MH problems not withstanding, fit the scenario of terror related crime.

In a survey, 1 in 6 young people in the UK don’t believe in the Holocaust.
The survey doesn’t mention the religion/ lack of or nationality or ethnicity of participants.

A good start would be banning any hate marches by any group.

The Muslim man who was attacked first was known to the attacker for many years.
He then actively looked for Jews after travelling to Golders Green.
At long last the government and police are taking much needed action ( unless it’s all talk ) on antisemitism, the police are pushing for it so the government will have to act.

An attack on another person was reported but initially they were not sure whether it was the same attacker and waited to confirm it.

" Mental health services" What a joke. You are on your own.

Franbern

Seems strange how the press and tv ignored the fact that this person actually attacked THREE people (not just the two reported). The first victim was a Muslim, so obviously did not fit the scenario of terrorist anti-semitism that has been headlines.

It does appear that these attacks are the result of a mental health issue and perhaps instead of that money going to policing, it should go to the local mental health team to try to prevent further problems.

Exactly. Proper funding needs to be channelled to the root cause. Mental health is woefully underfunded and we see the results of that on a worryingly more frequent basis.
As much as I liked Margaret Thatcher, one of her worst decisions was to close mental health institutions and introduce 'Care in the Community'. It was a failure in many ways because the communities were not adequately prepared for it and patients who had become institutionalised were no longer properly cared for in a secure environment. We reap what we sow.

Why should religious people be expected to hide their faith.. isn’t the point that we need to find better ways to prevent prejudice and bigotry. And improve mental health services

Well that's the French way, particularly in schools, no visible signs of religious symbolism. I'm not sure that's taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut and I think that approach would stir up even greater discontent, it's such a blanket approach to cultural identity , Sikhs and turbans for example, that are a crucial part of their beliefs.

* first not fiest

Franbern

Seems strange how the press and tv ignored the fact that this person actually attacked THREE people (not just the two reported). The first victim was a Muslim, so obviously did not fit the scenario of terrorist anti-semitism that has been headlines.

It does appear that these attacks are the result of a mental health issue and perhaps instead of that money going to policing, it should go to the local mental health team to try to prevent further problems.

I think the fiest victim WAS reported on by the press on Day 1. I think a poster on here, Casdon ?? mentioned it?

Caleo

Would it not be more sensible for religious people of all faiths to stop wearing ostentatiously religious clothing.

Why go about in public wearing uniforms that declare which side one is on. Religions are divisive enough without flaunting the differences.

I think you are on very shaky ground here, although I see your point.