West Midlands Police Scandal

I imagine you're correct Iam64 about trying to ban a pro Palestine demonstration. That of course doesn't make it right, merely expedient, which is by implication totally wrong and undermines the rule of law.

I’m not disagreeing with your view eazybee but / I imagine attempts to ban pro Palestinian demonstrations anywhere would result in huge demonstrations

The attempts to prevent supporters of the Maccabi football team are labelled antisemitic because they are directed at Jewish people; should it have been a muslim team then it would probably have been labelled Islamophobic.
The point is, no-one should be banned because of their country or faith; that is discrimination, and the fact that the West Midland Police force constructed and created false evidence, also hiding reports concerning Maccabi fans to support their case for banning, is shameful. It has been claimed it was done done in the cause of 'communality', to protect the residents, but in that case the Palestinian protests outside the stadium should also have been prevented.

eazybee

When it concerns false evidence produced to keep away only the fans of a Jewish team it is antisemitic.

To be clear, I have found no evidence to support a view that antisemitism played any part in WMP stating that its preferred tactical option was to reduce to zero the ticket allocation to Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.

Why should West Midlands Police wish to reduce to zero the ticket allocation for Maccabi Tel Aviv fans??
I take this as meaning that only supporters of the home team should be permitted to watch the match.
Or does this mean only supporters from Britain supporting Maccabi should be permitted to watch?
If so, why??

Good point and worth raising eazybee

Iam64's analogy is an interesting one.
I wonder what views might be on that were it to happen?

What it all boils down to is that we can’t allow any of our police forces to give in and make things up which suits both themselves and a certain demographic.

eazybee

When it concerns false evidence produced to keep away only the fans of a Jewish team it is antisemitic.

To be clear, I have found no evidence to support a view that antisemitism played any part in WMP stating that its preferred tactical option was to reduce to zero the ticket allocation to Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.

Why should West Midlands Police wish to reduce to zero the ticket allocation for Maccabi Tel Aviv fans??
I take this as meaning that only supporters of the home team should be permitted to watch the match.
Or does this mean only supporters from Britain supporting Maccabi should be permitted to watch?
If so, why??

I so see what you mean Eazybee plus a senior police officer did lie and say that the local Jewish community didn’t want the match to go ahead.
What I do think tho in this case it wasn’t antisemitism as such or at least not the main driver of what happened by the police
I think it was the antisemitism shown by the local people in
trying to get the match banned and the WMF going along with it as the easiest option so that evidence was made up and exaggerated to fit the bill.The government then got involved and Guildford then used the made up evidence to justify it.
He was rightly found out then he blamed AI and SM.

eazybee, thanks for your post. You raise an interesting point t. If the false evidence had been to prevent say for example, a Muslim cricket team from Pakistan would we have seen it as Islamophobic

Genuine question

When it concerns false evidence produced to keep away only the fans of a Jewish team it is antisemitic.

To be clear, I have found no evidence to support a view that antisemitism played any part in WMP stating that its preferred tactical option was to reduce to zero the ticket allocation to Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.

Why should West Midlands Police wish to reduce to zero the ticket allocation for Maccabi Tel Aviv fans??
I take this as meaning that only supporters of the home team should be permitted to watch the match.
Or does this mean only supporters from Britain supporting Maccabi should be permitted to watch?
If so, why??

You can say what you want of course and you did.I just don’t understand why any poster is mentioning antisemitism by the Police.
Individual police may well be, just like any group of people but it wasn’t a driving factor for the police force in this case.

Oreo I was just replying to posts where it was stated the whole thing wasn’t antisemitic, underlining that point. I wasn’t trying to make that ‘a thing’.
I seem to be replying to posts or echoing their sentiments and being shot down in flames for it.
So much for posters being able to say what they want in this discussion. Which is what I think you mentioned earlier.

Fallingstar

Of course it wasn’t antisemitic, what happened in the synagogue in Manchester was antisemitic, people spitting or swearing at children from Jewish schools is antisemitic. But a police force lying or creating false information to cover their backsides when making the wrong decision is not antisemitic.

Why are you making this a ‘thing’? Nobody on here, whatever their views have said that they think West Midlands Police did what they did out of antisemitism.So let’s kick that straight out of court.

Of course it wasn’t antisemitic, what happened in the synagogue in Manchester was antisemitic, people spitting or swearing at children from Jewish schools is antisemitic. But a police force lying or creating false information to cover their backsides when making the wrong decision is not antisemitic.

Am I right in thinking that the report emphasised that there was no antisemitism involved in the decision? (apologies if I’m wrong; still avoiding a lot of the news these days). If so I don’t think the media have pointed that out ( because it wouldn’t have suited their take on the story).

I don't think anyone on this thread has claimed that, but I could be wrong.

The crux of the matter is that the police did not produce substantial or truthful evidence when making their decision and relied upon AI, FB, obfuscation and lying by omission.

It is very worrying when a chief of police does this and brings into question how reliable our police forces are at upholding truth and justice in this country.

MayBee70

MaizieD

Allira

www.gov.uk/government/publications/inspection-of-police-forces-contributions-to-safety-advisory-groups-west-midlands-police/inspection-of-police-forces-contributions-to-safety-advisory-groups-west-midlands-police-accessible

It was an interpretation of the report by a journalist but nonetheless, it is fairly accurate to say that WMP were economical with the truth.

If not, then why has Guildford been forced to resign? Had they been vindicated, this would not have happened.

I realise it was an journalist's interpretation of the report, but who was the journalist, or where was it published?

It was indeed 'fairly accurate' but it was exaggerated in places, I felt, having read the report.

Am I right in thinking that the report emphasised that there was no antisemitism involved in the decision? (apologies if I’m wrong; still avoiding a lot of the news these days). If so I don’t think the media have pointed that out ( because it wouldn’t have suited their take on the story).

You are absolutely correct that the report says there was no antisemitism involved in the decision to ban the Maccabi fans

Page 4.

To be clear, I have found no evidence to support a view that antisemitism played any part in WMP stating that its preferred tactical option was to reduce to zero the ticket allocation to Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.

While I was pleased to see that I don't think it has any relevance to the current discussion: which is about the errors made by the police and their use of unreliable sources.

Thanks eazybee it did need discussing.
Craig Guildford has no shame, you can see that from his demeanour and wording of his resignation.
Simon Foster is a very left wing Corbynite and he should be sacked too for allowing Guildford to resign and saying that he acted with honour! Unbelievable.
But at least he has gone which is entirely right.
Hope his successor does a much better job.

Oreo thank you for starting this discussion; I only noticed it ten minutes ago and have read it all.. I agree with what you have said; it is a travesty of justice that Craig Guildford is allowed to resign, meaning he is entitled to receive his full pension. The man responsible for that decision, Simon Foster, Labour Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC0, is the man who appointed him, and has said 'he acted with honour' by retiring on Friday afternoon. Guildford said 'the political and media frenzy (around his position) had become 'detrimental to the West Midlands Police.' Actually, no; it has been his behaviour and attitude which has caused concer
I watched the interrogation of Guildford by Members of Parliament, and had I been a member of a jury, an ordinary member of the public, I would have convicted him, by the evidence given, his evasive answers, his general demeanor, by turns arrogant or defensive and his reiteration that his answers were truthful despite contradictions.
Later it was proved that an entirely false account of a football match that never existed had been used to claim violence on the part of Maccabi fans; also written evidence from Amsterdam police had made it clear that Maccabi fans had been taken into custody to protect them from a gang of 'Asian men' who were hunting them down with intent to throw them into the canals. This evidence was confirmed following a request from a current MP.

Craig Guildford is to be reinvestigated by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), also evidence given to the Home Affairs Committee by ex CC Guildford and other officers during evidence sessions in December and January.
He will be investigated to determine the extent of his involvement in the banning of Maccabi fans, the involvement of leaders of local mosques, and the extent of the cover-up of intelligence relating to armed gangs intent of hunting down and hurting people in the city of Birmingham.
A truly disgraceful affair.

MaizieD

Allira

www.gov.uk/government/publications/inspection-of-police-forces-contributions-to-safety-advisory-groups-west-midlands-police/inspection-of-police-forces-contributions-to-safety-advisory-groups-west-midlands-police-accessible

It was an interpretation of the report by a journalist but nonetheless, it is fairly accurate to say that WMP were economical with the truth.

If not, then why has Guildford been forced to resign? Had they been vindicated, this would not have happened.

I realise it was an journalist's interpretation of the report, but who was the journalist, or where was it published?

It was indeed 'fairly accurate' but it was exaggerated in places, I felt, having read the report.

Am I right in thinking that the report emphasised that there was no antisemitism involved in the decision? (apologies if I’m wrong; still avoiding a lot of the news these days). If so I don’t think the media have pointed that out ( because it wouldn’t have suited their take on the story).

MayBee70

Allira

MayBee70

I still think he made the right decision. And I shall be emailing the MP for Perry Bar to support him.

Even though he used false information to make the decision?

Not all of the information was false. Are you saying that Maccabi fans have never caused trouble at away matches, ever?

A Birmingham-based British Islamic preacher has urged his followers to show 'no mercy' to Israeli Maccabi Tel Aviv football fans if they visit the city next month - amid mounting fury at the police's decision to ban Macabi fans, from an Aston Villa game.
So you're saying the "good people" of Birmingham aren't violent. This is England, not pakistan , yet you maybe have no problems with this ?. Now police being linked to Muslim extremists in said city. All available to Google.

Thanks AGAA4 kind of you to say that.

Fallingstar

And am not trying to divert attention away from the topic or shut down a discussion or insult a poster’s son by saying that.
So back to the discussion
Note to self - if BP is high avoid the News&Politics thread.

Please stay on the N & P threads your views are important. You will be challenged but just stick to your point of view. I've been on GN for many years and challenges from most posters aren't personal.

At the risk of further diversion I wonder why Craig Guildford has been allowed to retire rather than be sacked which would seem a more appropriate action, and one that would usually be applied to a more junior officer. The man who hired Guildford – and who refused to fire him – is Simon Foster, the West Midlands police and crime commissioner, who said Guildford had “acted with honour” in retiring.
There are Freemasons in senior positions in the police so I just wonder .........

Nobody has to comment if they really don’t want to, but why wouldn’t they? It’s all over the news not a secret matter.
If a poster previously agreed with Craig Guildford and now sees what he and presumably other senior police in that force did, they could have a change of heart about it or they can double down on their previous views.But what shouldn’t happen is that anyone feels that they can’t discuss it.This is on the news and politics thread and is important.

And am not trying to divert attention away from the topic or shut down a discussion or insult a poster’s son by saying that.
So back to the discussion
Note to self - if BP is high avoid the News&Politics thread.

I didn’t think this thread was about trying to put individual posters on the spot. Seems a bit unfair imho.

Allira

www.gov.uk/government/publications/inspection-of-police-forces-contributions-to-safety-advisory-groups-west-midlands-police/inspection-of-police-forces-contributions-to-safety-advisory-groups-west-midlands-police-accessible

It was an interpretation of the report by a journalist but nonetheless, it is fairly accurate to say that WMP were economical with the truth.

If not, then why has Guildford been forced to resign? Had they been vindicated, this would not have happened.

I realise it was an journalist's interpretation of the report, but who was the journalist, or where was it published?

It was indeed 'fairly accurate' but it was exaggerated in places, I felt, having read the report.