The Met Police are hunting down two women who attended a pro-Palestine demonstration in London at the weekend.
The women were photographed wearing jacket patches, which appear to depict paragliders. The images may be about the motorised paragliders used by Hamas to attack targets in Israel last weekend, including over 200 people killed at a music festival.
The women are being asked to turn themselves in, and the public has been invited to phone 101 if they know the identity of the two. This comes at the same time Police arrested a woman in Brighton on suspicion of supporting Hamas and a 67 yr.
An old man in London draped in a Union flag was also charged for hurling racist abuse at a crowd gathering at Whitehall. A Police spokesman has said the man has been bailed and will appear in court on the 2nd of November.
So there we have it, the Police running around looking for people who support one side or another in foreign conflict.
The prime minister also made it clear about these types of actions when he said: “Hamas is an illegal terrorist organisation. It’s clear under the law that the support and glorification of Hamas is illegal, and those offences are punishable with up to almost 14 years in jail.”
Have you ever paused to question why specific laws are in place that render it a criminal offence to express support for terrorist groups in the Middle East? Additionally, have you ever noticed how every social media advertisement or television channel seems to be urging people to express empathy and solidarity towards a particular Middle Eastern government?
In times of confusion, it’s natural to feel lost and uncertain. Those who appear to have a clear understanding may have only some answers. However, one thing is evident – the need for creating laws to prohibit support for specific groups implies the existence of such support. This raises the question – what is the source of this support, and why does it exist? Understanding the root cause of such support is crucial in addressing the issue effectively.
The UK’s decision to push pluralism and tolerance has resulted in a significant influx of individuals with nefarious intentions, including criminals, religious extremists, and foreign nationals who prioritise their allegiance to their country of origin. This has led to a surge in the number of such individuals crossing the country’s borders.
Pluralism, which promotes acceptance of diverse opinions and beliefs, was intended to end conflicts between individuals, peoples’ and ideas. However, it has only resulted in the multiplication of such struggles. Irrespective of which side of the debate you align with or which individuals you support, the most feasible solution would be to confine these conflicts to regions where they are pertinent instead of disrupting our daily lives.
