The Left don't care about racist attacks when the victims are Jews
On Monday evening, three Jewish teenagers were attacked at Hampstead Underground station. According to a report by Jewish security charity Shomrim, a group of six or seven men attacked the boys, one of whom had to be taken to hospital. It was, British Transport Police later said, a 'racially motivated assault'.
Unless you read the Jewish media, you will be entirely unaware of what seems to be the latest attack on Jews for being Jews. Not a word on the BBC; not a word anywhere. Not a peep from any minister. Not a dickie bird from the Mayor of London. Nothing. It's just another incident. Just another statistic. Just another yawn, in fact. So what; it's only Jews.
Let's try a thought experiment. Imagine it had not been Jewish teenagers attacked for doing nothing except being visibly Jewish. Imagine instead it had been three Muslim boys attacked by a gang of skinhead thugs. Do you think there would have been total silence in response? Do you think the Home Secretary and other figures would have been mute? Do you think the Mayor of London would have ignored the attack completely? Or do you think, as I do, that there would have been entirely justified outrage, and that we would likely even now be in the middle of a national debate over bigotry?
But it was Jews who were attacked, and – as we have seen with unrelenting, unremitting frequency since the hate marches began after the October 7 massacre of 1200 Jews by Hamas – Jews don't count, as David Baddiel put it in his brilliant book of that title. Because the lack of any response to this attack is not a one-off. It is part of a now deeply entrenched pattern demonstrating that when it comes to hatred and bigotry, so long as Jews are the target then the bar that needs to be crossed for action in response is not so much high as out of sight.
The hate marches which are now a regular feature of city life are suffused with anti=Semitism. Backing for Palestinian 'resistance' – terror – is ubiquitous. Support for Hamas and Hezbollah – both of which are prescribed – is repeatedly on display. Calls to 'globalise the intifada' – are the norm.
You want to globalise the intifada? Start at Hampstead underground station – after last week's murders in Washington DC.
But it's not the perpetrators of hate who are dealt with. It's those who oppose it. Last week, for example, the Telegraph reported that a Jewish counter-protester was arrested and charged after he was seen holding a placard satirising Hassan Nasrallah, the former Hezbollah leader. In his police questioning he was asked over and over again if he agreed that the image would offend 'clearly pro-Hezbollah and anti-Israel' activists. No one who follows the police's actions – last year the Met pinned down a counter-protestor carrying a banner reading 'Hamas is terrorist' at a march and then arrested him – will be remotely surprised by this. At a march in Manchester after the October 7 massacre, for example, a banner reading 'Manchester supports Palestinian resistance' was protected by police standing alongside it.
Open anti-Semitism is rarely met by action, but it is often accompanied by drivel, the most frequent example of which is the phrase repeated ad nauseam by politicians that 'There is no place for anti-Semitism', followed by the name of a city or an organisation which has just proved there is every place for anti-Semitism in its fold.
In December, for example, after an expose of truly shocking examples of open anti-Semitism from NHS staff, health secretary Wes Streeting came out with the usual words: 'There is no place for anti-Semitism in the NHS'. The expose had shown that there is in fact a warm welcome for anti-Semitism in the NHS, with none of the NHS Trusts or managers having done anything about it. The same phrase falls regularly from the mouths of Yvette Cooper and Sir Sadiq Khan, but only after an incident which has proved the opposite.
This time, after Monday's attack on three Jewish boys on the Underground, they can't even be bothered to be as unbothered as before and trot out some meaningless platitude. Jews hate? Assault? We really don't care.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Black schoolgirl, 15, was 'physically violated' by Met Police officers who strip-searched her on suspicion of carrying cannabis while on her period, misconduct hearing is told
A black schoolgirl was 'physically violated' by three Met Police officers who strip-searched her after wrongly suspecting she was carrying cannabis, a misconduct hearing was told. The 15-year-old girl, known as Child Q, had arrived at the school in Hackney, East London, for a mock exam when she was taken to the medical room to be strip-searched while teachers remained outside. The hearing was told the search involved having to undress herself, including her underwear, leading to the 'exposure of her intimate parts'. This is despite the schoolgirl telling officers she was menstruating, the hearing was told. Her bag and blazer were also searched, and after this did not lead to any drugs being found, she then had her hair combed, revealing no signs of cannabis. Breaches of the Met's standards of professional behaviour amount to gross misconduct and can lead to dismissal. Elliot Gold, representing the Independent Office for Police Conduct, which is bringing the case, said the search formed part of a 'no stone unturned' approach, despite it being an incident that, he argued, 'could never have justified such intrusion, namely the possible discovery of a small amount of cannabis'. Trainee Detective Constable Kristina Linge, PC Victoria Wray and PC Rafal Szmydynski all deny gross misconduct over their treatment of the girl. All three officers were PCs at the time of the search, which caused outrage over Child Q's treatment and led to protests outside Stoke Newington Police Station. Today, Mr Gold told the hearing the point where Child Q said she was on her period should have been the 'opportunity' for the 'officers to reconsider the necessity and proportionality of the search' but they instead told her 'we are all women here' and thereby treated Child Q as an adult rather than a child'. The incident happened in December 2020 when the school's safeguarding deputy alerted police, saying that Child Q smelled of cannabis, could potentially be bringing drugs into the school, and she might be at risk of exploitation in the community. The police went to the school after Child Q's teachers raised concerns about her smelling of cannabis that morning, just a few weeks after a similar incident. PCs Linge and Szmydynski carried out a search that exposed the girl's intimate areas, despite the act being described as 'disproportionate in all the circumstances,' according to the allegations. PCs Linge and Wray are also accused of carrying out, or allowing, the search in a manner seen as 'unjustified, inappropriate, disproportionate, humiliating and degrading.' All of this happened without authorisation, without an appropriate adult and no adequate concern being given to Child Q's age, sex, or the need to treat her as a child, it is also alleged. PCs Szmydynski and Linge are also accused of giving a misleading account of the incident afterwards. No formal record of the search was made at the time, neither in the officers' pocket notebooks nor on the standard stop-and-search form, which would typically be required for any street-level stop and search. The IOPC asked the panel to think of 'why the officers overreacted to such an extent and why their actions fell so far below what was required of them'. Mr Gold said that any suggestion by the officers that the safeguarding deputy was acting as the appropriate adult, even though she was not present during the search, should be rejected. He said: 'It was, or should have been, obvious to these officers that the safeguarding deputy could not act as the appropriate adult. 'On the officers' own accounts, the safeguarding deputy was the person who had summoned the police to the school, was Child Q's "accuser", was adamant that the officers would find cannabis on Child Q's person and, so, was not a person who could reasonably be expected to challenge the police in their actions.' Black people were more likely to be stopped and searched than white people, and discrimination is a 'contributing factor' in stop and search, it was suggested. Mr Gold also told the panel 'black schoolchildren are more likely to be treated as older and less vulnerable or in need of protection and support than their white peers'. He said: 'She was treated as being older than she was, more likely to be involved in criminality, and subjected to a more intrusive search, than she would have been had she been a white schoolgirl in the same situation, arriving at school, smelling of cannabis.' Mr Gold said that sacking the officers would be 'justified' if the allegations are proved, adding: 'Their actions and omissions have resulted in Child Q suffering harm to her mental health and feeling physically violated. 'They have caused Child Q and her mother to feel demeaned and disrespected. 'They have brought discredit on the Metropolitan Police and upset race-relations yet further between the police and minority communities.' The panel heard that this 'most intrusive' form of search of a child should only be used where 'necessary and reasonable', must have authorisation from a sergeant, and involve an appropriate adult if it concerns a child. It must be recorded, and two same sex officers are needed if intimate parts will be exposed. When no drugs were found after the strip search, Child Q's hair was also scoured. He told the panel: 'Child Q is black. It is the director general's case that this kind of gross overreaction by the police - to strip search a school pupil on suspicion of something relatively minor, possession of cannabis - would not have happened to a white pupil and is, regrettably, explained by Child Q's race, whether or not the officers were consciously aware of this at the time.'
BBC News
19 minutes ago
- BBC News
Runner was 'getting life back' before fatal Stretham crash
An associate of the tech billionaire Mike Lynch had been "enjoying getting his life back" when he was fatally struck by a car while out on a run, an inquest Chamberlain died in hospital three days after a collision involving a Vauxhall car on the A1123 at Stretham in Cambridgeshire on 17 August 52-year-old had previously faced fraud charges in the US alongside Mr Lynch, who died after his superyacht Bayesian sank off the coast of Sicily on 19 August last a statement read by lawyer Sally Hobson, Mr Chamberlain's widow Karen said he had taken up running after the fraud charge, and it had "helped him mentally stay calm and focus on what was ahead". Mr Chamberlain and Mr Lynch were found not guilty of the charge in June last year following a trial at a federal court in San Francisco. Mrs Chamberlain said her husband would "meticulously spend hours planning his routes" and competed in ultra-distance was "safety conscious", she said, and he would wear one earbud but leave the other ear told the inquest at New Shire Hall, Alconbury Weald, that he had been home from the US for two months and was "making up for lost time, enjoying getting his life back". 'A matter of seconds' The inquest heard the collision happened as Mr Chamberlain was crossing a road between two parts of a bridleway and he was struck by the car as it crested a humpback a statement summarised by area coroner Caroline Jones, the driver involved said that as she "approached the bridge she proceeded down the incline" and a man "suddenly emerged into the road".She said she saw Mr Chamberlain "looking to his left away from her and only looked to his right just before the collision".She said she had "braked hard and steered to the nearside", but "he was too close" and the front offside of the vehicle collided with said she had been driving within the 60mph speed limit, had been on her way to a shop in Newmarket, Suffolk and had "no time pressure", the coroner said.A witness statement said Mr Chamberlain was thrown "approximately 15 feet" in the air and "the entire incident must have been a matter of seconds".The coroner said the female driver of the car should not be named at the hearing. Police forensic collision investigator PC Ian Masters said it was "not an ideal crossing point by any stretch of the imagination".Asked by the coroner if it was his view that it was not an avoidable collision, Mr Masters replied: "Yes, that's correct".The coroner concluded that Mr Chamberlain died as the result of a road traffic shared the concerns of the family that the humpback bridge was an "irredeemable barrier" to visibility for pedestrians and other road said she would write to Cambridgeshire County Council as the highways authority for further information before deciding whether a report to help prevent future deaths was Chamberlain's daughter Ella said in a statement to the inquest that her father was the "perfect role model in every way".His son Teddy said in a statement: "He was the glue of our family, always ready with an answer."The mental and physical strength he showed was beyond anything I could imagine."He added that he was the "greatest dad I could ever have asked for and I'm so proud to be his son". Follow Cambridgeshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
MPs accuse Apple and Google of profiting from rise in phone thefts
MPs have accused Apple and Google of profiting from multimillion-pound phone-snatching operations that police say are masterminded by organised crime gangs in Britain, Algeria and China. In 2024, 80,000 phone devices of all kinds were stolen in London alone, up a quarter from 64,000 in 2023. The devices had a street value of about £20m, and iPhones made up the majority. In evidence to the House of Commons science and technology committee on Tuesday, the Metropolitan police said they wanted smartphone companies to start preventing stolen devices from accessing their cloud services so that they are no longer 'smart', therefore dramatically reducing their resale value. But 'so far they have not agreed', despite calls to do so since 2023, said Darren Scates, the Met's chief digital data and technology officer. Martin Wrigley, a Liberal Democrat member of the committee, said: 'Apple and Google continue to make profit and continue to sell more phones because these phones are not removed from the system. You [the companies] owe it to the customers around the world to implement this immediately. No ifs, no buts, just do it.' Asked why they had not done so, representatives of the firms pointed to other security features, particularly those that protect customer data. Simon Wingrove, a software engineering manager at Google, said its system was 'robust and works very well'. Gary Davis, a senior director in regulatory and legal at Apple, said it was concerned about disconnections being used for fraud, with bad actors wanting to get data and the power to delete accounts for blackmail. Kit Malthouse, the Conservative former policing minister, said it felt as if Apple was 'dragging your feet and sitting behind this is a very strong commercial incentive'. He said: 'The fact that £50m of phones are stolen in London every year – if that stopped that would be £50m in sales that would be depressed.' He also suggested Apple was benefiting from selling services to the users of millions of stolen phones around the world. Davis responded: 'I don't believe we are profiting. It is necessary to refute the suggestion that we benefit from our users somehow suffering the traumatic event of having their phone stolen and being disconnected from their lives. We have invested many hundreds of millions in designing in these protections.' The Met said all types of thefts were down 15% in April and May and around two-thirds of thefts related to mobile phones. Commander James Conway cautioned that it was a 'tentative reduction' and said it was likely to be a result of increased police prioritisation and phone users showing more caution. Scotland Yard recently bought a fleet of high-speed ebikes to chase snatchers. Conway said theft and robbery were 'easy crimes to commit' in London, and he described 'teenagers on [high-powered ebikes] riding down the A10 committing 10, 20 thefts or robberies on the go, packaging those phones swiftly into silver foil or Faraday bags to make it more difficult for us to identify location, and then swiftly passing them on to a middle-market handler and ultimately out of the UK.' Most of the phones being stolen are the most expensive Apple versions, which police believe are specifically targeted and sell on the street for between £300 and £400. Part of the trade is driven by the relative high cost of phones in lower-income countries. It is estimated that more than 90% of stolen phones are reused while the rest are stripped for parts, with the screens particularly valuable. The hearing began with Malthouse saying he had witnessed an attempted phone theft by two young masked men on bikes on Tuesday morning while he was heading to parliament.
