'I can't think of a better day to march for ceasefire': Why protesters are marching on Armistice Day
Sky News
Updated Fri, 10 November 2023
"As humans we can't stand for this," says Isa Ahmed from Birmingham. "It's against human rights. It's against international law."
The 17-year-old youth worker says he is traumatised by the images he's seen on social media and that's why he will be travelling to London to take part in Saturday's march.
He said: "You see horrific images; videos of people being murdered in Palestine and Gaza.
"I feel like I need to go out there, have a voice because they've been denied their voice. They've not been able to speak out.
"The internet has been blacked out. It's a complete siege and we need to go out there and show people that, as humans, we shouldn't be standing by this."
We've heard many opinions from politicians to columnists about why people are going to the pro-Palestinian March in London, but what do the protesters themselves say?
'No more bloodshed'
Isa's brother-in-law Abdul-Rahman Ahmed, 19, also plans to attend the rally.
He said: "All we are calling for at the moment is a ceasefire. A ceasefire for Palestinians, the Israelis and ensure that there's no more bloodshed."
Many in the Jewish community feel that some of the anger during the protests has been wrongly directed at them.
Language used by some on the march has been antisemitic. The Home Secretary Suella Braverman described the protests as "a hate march".
But Abdul-Rahman said: "It's our right, regardless as to whether it's to do with Palestinian issues or whether it's to do with Black Lives Matter.
"Protest is a legal right in this country. The organisers have ensured that everyone is safe and everyone who is protesting is doing it peacefully, and my message for anyone who is going to turn up and cause trouble - it's better you just stay at home."
'A duty to turn up'
Marlon Kameka and his friend Georgia from North London will also be joining the march. Neither are Muslims but both are activists who have campaigned before for the rights of Palestinians.
Georgia said: "We are stepping into an era where a genocide can be live-streamed into our phones and the people in power who are supposed to protect us are doing nothing and the media are trying to divert public opinion away.
"So, all the people of Palestine have are ordinary people, and so we have a duty to turn up for them.
"I think (the protest) has been entirely misrepresented for political agenda, which I think is incredibly shameful."
Marlon adds: "When we've got a government and an opposition who can't say the word ceasefire, it's down to us to go out there and speak for the people who are being slaughtered."
Read more:
'Disrespectful' pro-Palestine march will go ahead on Armistice Day, PM says
Sky News
Updated Fri, 10 November 2023
"As humans we can't stand for this," says Isa Ahmed from Birmingham. "It's against human rights. It's against international law."
The 17-year-old youth worker says he is traumatised by the images he's seen on social media and that's why he will be travelling to London to take part in Saturday's march.
He said: "You see horrific images; videos of people being murdered in Palestine and Gaza.
"I feel like I need to go out there, have a voice because they've been denied their voice. They've not been able to speak out.
"The internet has been blacked out. It's a complete siege and we need to go out there and show people that, as humans, we shouldn't be standing by this."
We've heard many opinions from politicians to columnists about why people are going to the pro-Palestinian March in London, but what do the protesters themselves say?
'No more bloodshed'
Isa's brother-in-law Abdul-Rahman Ahmed, 19, also plans to attend the rally.
He said: "All we are calling for at the moment is a ceasefire. A ceasefire for Palestinians, the Israelis and ensure that there's no more bloodshed."
Many in the Jewish community feel that some of the anger during the protests has been wrongly directed at them.
Language used by some on the march has been antisemitic. The Home Secretary Suella Braverman described the protests as "a hate march".
But Abdul-Rahman said: "It's our right, regardless as to whether it's to do with Palestinian issues or whether it's to do with Black Lives Matter.
"Protest is a legal right in this country. The organisers have ensured that everyone is safe and everyone who is protesting is doing it peacefully, and my message for anyone who is going to turn up and cause trouble - it's better you just stay at home."
'A duty to turn up'
Marlon Kameka and his friend Georgia from North London will also be joining the march. Neither are Muslims but both are activists who have campaigned before for the rights of Palestinians.
Georgia said: "We are stepping into an era where a genocide can be live-streamed into our phones and the people in power who are supposed to protect us are doing nothing and the media are trying to divert public opinion away.
"So, all the people of Palestine have are ordinary people, and so we have a duty to turn up for them.
"I think (the protest) has been entirely misrepresented for political agenda, which I think is incredibly shameful."
Marlon adds: "When we've got a government and an opposition who can't say the word ceasefire, it's down to us to go out there and speak for the people who are being slaughtered."
Read more:
'Disrespectful' pro-Palestine march will go ahead on Armistice Day, PM says
Is Israel-Hamas war driving a wedge between Jewish and Muslim communities in UK
The counter argument is that this is war.
Sadly civilians die in conflict, and Israel is a population trying to defend itself, striking back, albeit with more force, against a horrific attack on 7 October where hundreds were killed and hostages taken who are still being held by Hamas.
Marlon said: "This was not started on 7 October. You have to go back and look at it in a historical context.
"And it's not a war - because in a war you have two equal powers. The Palestinian people do not have the military capacity that the Israelis do. What we need to look at is the fact that civilians are dying.
"I want us to amplify Palestinian voices, and the first thing we should be asking them is not 'do you condemn Hamas?'.
"The first thing we should ask is 'what do you want?' and I believe what they want is freedom and liberation and I believe once you get that, the violence will stop."
March to coincide with Remembrance Day
The demonstration is not planned to go near the Cenotaph. But it is coming to the capital on a weekend of reflection and mourning.
It's feared it will cause disruption to those who want to remember the sacrifices made to defend this country.
"Armistice means ceasefire," Georgia said.
"I can't think of a better day to march for ceasefire than on that day. It's poetry and it's essential we live the values that Armistice Day is supposed to represent.
"For my relatives who died in World War One and World War Two, I know they would want us to turn up to make sure we reduce conflict to save lives."
Nearly 75pc of Tory voters back Suella Braverman’s call for Armistice Day protest to be banned
Genevieve Holl-Allen
Fri, 10 November 2023
Palestine protest
Genevieve Holl-Allen
Fri, 10 November 2023
Palestine protest
Nearly three-quarters of Tory voters back Suella Braverman in calling for Saturday’s pro-Palestine march to be banned, The Telegraph can disclose.
Exclusive polling shows that more than 72 per cent of Conservatives believe that the planned protest should not be allowed to go ahead on Armistice Day.
In contrast, just a quarter of Labour voters believe that the march should be halted.
The polling, conducted on Thursday, also suggests that only 16 per cent of those aged over 65 believe the protest should be permitted, compared with over one in four of those aged between 18 and 24.
In total, just over half of respondents believe the London march should not go ahead, compared with 26 per cent who think it should.
It comes after Mrs Braverman became embroiled in a row with the Metropolitan Police over Saturday’s planned march, urging Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley to intervene.
Rishi Sunak has accepted that the protest will go ahead, but warned the Met Police chief that he would be held accountable if Remembrance events were to be disrupted.
The Prime Minister has also faced calls to sack the Home Secretary over comments she made in an article in The Times, accusing officers of “playing favourites” with Left-wing protesters.
No 10 did not sign off the final version of Mrs Braverman’s article, with her team ignoring some of the edits requested by Downing Street.
However, the Prime Minister’s spokesman said on Friday that he had “full confidence” in the Home Secretary.
The polling, conducted by Electoral Calculus and Find Out Now, also reveals a divide among young adults about whether Israel has the right to defend itself with military action in Gaza, with 25 per cent in favour and 28 per cent against.
In total, 46 per cent of all respondents believe Israel has the right to defend itself militarily.
This rises to 65 per cent among Tory voters in 2019, but falls to just over 28 per cent among Labour voters.
Meanwhile, the polling reveals that the public believes that neither Mr Sunak nor Sir Keir Starmer are handling the Israel-Gaza situation well - but the Prime Minister narrowly comes out on top.
Just 6 per cent of those surveyed believe that the Labour leader is handling the situation well, compared with 9 per cent for Mr Sunak.
Sir Keir was warned this week that he faces a dozen resignations from his front bench over his refusal to call for a ceasefire in the conflict.
Martin Baxter, the chief executive of Electoral Calculus, said: “The poll shows the public is not supportive of the pro-Palestine march in London on Saturday.
“People are also fairly supportive of Israel’s right to self-defence, which is the policy of both Conservative and Labour parties.”
The poll took place on Nov 9 and involved 2,001 British adults
Suella Braverman meets Met chief amid Tory row over protest article
Sky News
Updated Fri, 10 November 2023
Suella Braverman has met the head of the Metropolitan Police to offer the force her "full backing" ahead of controversial pro-Palestine protests taking place this weekend.
On Wednesday, the home secretary wrote an article for The Times newspaper - which was not signed off by Number 10 - attacking the force for "playing favourites" with left wing protesters, and accusing them of "double standards".
It followed her earlier remarks describing the demonstrations as "hate marches".
Politics live: Sunak warned to 'tread carefully' over Braverman row
Ms Braverman's comments have ignited a row within the Conservative Party, with some backing the home secretary, while others are calling for her to resign or be sacked.
Numerous ministers have also distanced themselves from the remarks, including Chancellor Jeremy Hunt, who said on Friday: "The words that she used are not words that I myself would have used."
Opposition parties also accused her of picking a fight with the police, and demanded she be ousted from the Home Office.
But Number 10 continued to say they had "confidence" in her.
Now in an apparent climb down, the minister has met with the head of the force, Sir Mark Rowley, with a source close to Ms Braverman saying she "emphasised her full backing for the police in what will be a complex and challenging situation and expressed confidence that any criminality will be dealt with robustly".
The prime minister has been under increasing pressure to take action over Ms Braverman's comments about this weekend's protests that coincide with Armistice Day.
While the pro-Palestinian march is not set to take place until almost two hours after the nation holds a two-minute silence, and is not due to go to past the Cenotaph in Whitehall, some - including the home secretary - have branded the event offensive and inappropriate.
Sir Mark was summoned to Downing Street earlier in the week to discuss policing of the march with Rishi Sunak, who vowed to hold the most senior office in the UK "accountable" for what happens on Saturday.
But, despite airing his own concerns about the protest - calling it "disrespectful" - the prime minister conceded there was "a right to peacefully protest" and the march could go ahead.
The Met chief stood by his decision to let the protest take place throughout the week, saying the "legal threshold" to stop it on security grounds "had not been met".
However, despite the statements from both Mr Sunak and Sir Mark, the home secretary took to the papers to express her anger at the force's actions - and publicly contradict her party leader.
After causing a rift within the Conservatives - brought into sharp focus by WhatsApp messages leaked to Sky News - Ms Braverman now appears to be attempting to smooth over relations with the Met.
A source close to her said: "The home secretary and the commissioner of the Metropolitan Police met this afternoon to discuss the policing of demonstrations to be held tomorrow, on Armistice Day.
"The commissioner outlined plans to continue working to maintain public order, ensure compliance with the law and maintain the safety of participants, police officers and the general public.
"The home secretary emphasised her full backing for the police in what will be a complex and challenging situation and expressed confidence that any criminality will be dealt with robustly."
Earlier on Friday, the Met released details of the "significant" operation it planned to run in London over the weekend to ensure Remembrance services are protected from disruption by both the march and any counter-protests, which some fear may be held by the far right.
The force said more than 2,000 officers will be on the streets, an exclusion zone had been set up around Whitehall - where Sunday's main Remembrance event will take place - and putting a 24-hour police presence around the Cenotaph.
In a lengthy statement, they added: "We'll be using an extensive set of powers to prevent any disruption whatsoever to Remembrance events, policing the demonstration as it passes through parts of the capital, while protecting our communities from those intent on inciting hate, violence and disorder."
Shortly before news broke of Ms Braverman's meeting, the prime minister also issued a statement saying he had been "reassured" by the police over their operation that Remembrance services would be protected.
Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman have been in contact over article critical of police but no sacking … yet
Ben Riley-Smith
Fri, 10 November 2023
Suella Braverman, pictured on Friday, remains in post for now but some in her own party want Rishi Sunak to sack her - Eddie Mulholland
Rishi Sunak has been in touch with Suella Braverman, The Telegraph can disclose, as he considers calls to sack her after she wrote an unauthorised article accusing the police of bias.
The Prime Minister and his team are continuing to look into how edits Number 10 demanded be made to the Home Secretary’s draft piece for The Times were not included in the final version.
On Friday, Jeremy Hunt became the most senior Cabinet minister to distance himself from Mrs Braverman’s rhetoric, saying he would not have said “the words that she used”.
There were fresh Tory calls for her to go, with Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, a Conservative MP, arguing that if Mrs Braverman did not agree to be less publicly critical of the police she should be moved.
But supporters on the Tory benches were also becoming more vocal, including David TC Davies, the Welsh Secretary, and Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary.
A Cabinet minister told The Telegraph they believed the Prime Minister had decided against a “summary sacking” of Mrs Braverman, a position echoed by Number 10 insiders.
Amid continued speculation about if and when a cabinet reshuffle could take place, some government figures suggested it could be delayed until after Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision on the Government’s Rwanda deportation scheme.
For the second day running, Downing Street refused to publicly say whether Mr Sunak had talked to Mrs Braverman about her Times piece on the police’s handling of protests.
But The Telegraph understands that the Prime Minister has been in touch with Mrs Braverman as Number 10 tries to get to the bottom of what happened. How the PM has communicated with the Home Secretary and what exactly was discussed is unclear. By 9pm on Friday no sacking had been announced.
Row continues over article
Mrs Braverman spent a large part of Thursday in hospital by the side of a close family member who was undergoing an operation. She was at home on Friday.
The row centres on an article in The Times published online on Wednesday evening in which Mrs Braverman accused police officers of showing bias in how they handled different demonstrations.
She wrote protests must be policed “even-handedly”, adding: “Unfortunately, there is a perception that senior police officers play favourites when it comes to protesters.
“During Covid, why was it that lockdown objectors were given no quarter by public order police yet Black Lives Matters demonstrators were enabled, allowed to break rules and even greeted with officers taking the knee?”
The article piled pressure on the Metropolitan Police ahead of the pro-Palestine march on Armistice Day in London and came just hours after Mr Sunak had defended the right for people to protest.
It then emerged that Number 10 had demanded some lines of Mrs Braverman’s article were rewritten before publication, but the requested edits were not incorporated.
Debates about who would replace Mrs Braverman should she be moved from the Home Office by Mr Sunak are playing out in private among Tory MPs and advisers.
Potential home secretaries
Robert Jenrick, the immigration minister, Oliver Dowden, the Deputy prime minister, Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, and Victoria Atkins, the financial secretary, have been named as possible successors in the speculation.
Mrs Braverman’s article and the implication on her Cabinet future has split Tory MPs, with moderates calling for a sacking and figures on the Right rallying to her side.
Mr Hunt distanced himself from the Home Secretary’s remarks. He said: “As many other Cabinet ministers have said, the words that she used are not words that I myself would have used.
“But I have a productive relationship with her as a colleague and I have always given her the money that she needs to fund the police, bring down crime and to fund the immigration and asylum system.”
He added: “The Prime Minister has said that he has full confidence in her and I have nothing further to add.”
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the 1922 Committee treasurer, said Mr Sunak should have a “very serious conversation” with Mrs Braverman to make sure she changes her behaviour or “possibly consider it is time for her to move to another job in the Cabinet”.
But Mr Davies said Mrs Braverman should stay in position because “police don’t always get it right”, adding: “I have read the article and I didn’t read it the way everyone else seems to have done.”
Sir Jacob said: “The Home Secretary has said what many people are thinking and the calls to sack her seem to be disproportionate because whether she’s broken the ministerial code or not is something of a moot point.”
Sky News
Updated Fri, 10 November 2023
Suella Braverman has met the head of the Metropolitan Police to offer the force her "full backing" ahead of controversial pro-Palestine protests taking place this weekend.
On Wednesday, the home secretary wrote an article for The Times newspaper - which was not signed off by Number 10 - attacking the force for "playing favourites" with left wing protesters, and accusing them of "double standards".
It followed her earlier remarks describing the demonstrations as "hate marches".
Politics live: Sunak warned to 'tread carefully' over Braverman row
Ms Braverman's comments have ignited a row within the Conservative Party, with some backing the home secretary, while others are calling for her to resign or be sacked.
Numerous ministers have also distanced themselves from the remarks, including Chancellor Jeremy Hunt, who said on Friday: "The words that she used are not words that I myself would have used."
Opposition parties also accused her of picking a fight with the police, and demanded she be ousted from the Home Office.
But Number 10 continued to say they had "confidence" in her.
Now in an apparent climb down, the minister has met with the head of the force, Sir Mark Rowley, with a source close to Ms Braverman saying she "emphasised her full backing for the police in what will be a complex and challenging situation and expressed confidence that any criminality will be dealt with robustly".
The prime minister has been under increasing pressure to take action over Ms Braverman's comments about this weekend's protests that coincide with Armistice Day.
While the pro-Palestinian march is not set to take place until almost two hours after the nation holds a two-minute silence, and is not due to go to past the Cenotaph in Whitehall, some - including the home secretary - have branded the event offensive and inappropriate.
Sir Mark was summoned to Downing Street earlier in the week to discuss policing of the march with Rishi Sunak, who vowed to hold the most senior office in the UK "accountable" for what happens on Saturday.
But, despite airing his own concerns about the protest - calling it "disrespectful" - the prime minister conceded there was "a right to peacefully protest" and the march could go ahead.
The Met chief stood by his decision to let the protest take place throughout the week, saying the "legal threshold" to stop it on security grounds "had not been met".
However, despite the statements from both Mr Sunak and Sir Mark, the home secretary took to the papers to express her anger at the force's actions - and publicly contradict her party leader.
After causing a rift within the Conservatives - brought into sharp focus by WhatsApp messages leaked to Sky News - Ms Braverman now appears to be attempting to smooth over relations with the Met.
A source close to her said: "The home secretary and the commissioner of the Metropolitan Police met this afternoon to discuss the policing of demonstrations to be held tomorrow, on Armistice Day.
"The commissioner outlined plans to continue working to maintain public order, ensure compliance with the law and maintain the safety of participants, police officers and the general public.
"The home secretary emphasised her full backing for the police in what will be a complex and challenging situation and expressed confidence that any criminality will be dealt with robustly."
Earlier on Friday, the Met released details of the "significant" operation it planned to run in London over the weekend to ensure Remembrance services are protected from disruption by both the march and any counter-protests, which some fear may be held by the far right.
The force said more than 2,000 officers will be on the streets, an exclusion zone had been set up around Whitehall - where Sunday's main Remembrance event will take place - and putting a 24-hour police presence around the Cenotaph.
In a lengthy statement, they added: "We'll be using an extensive set of powers to prevent any disruption whatsoever to Remembrance events, policing the demonstration as it passes through parts of the capital, while protecting our communities from those intent on inciting hate, violence and disorder."
Shortly before news broke of Ms Braverman's meeting, the prime minister also issued a statement saying he had been "reassured" by the police over their operation that Remembrance services would be protected.
Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman have been in contact over article critical of police but no sacking … yet
Ben Riley-Smith
Fri, 10 November 2023
Suella Braverman, pictured on Friday, remains in post for now but some in her own party want Rishi Sunak to sack her - Eddie Mulholland
Rishi Sunak has been in touch with Suella Braverman, The Telegraph can disclose, as he considers calls to sack her after she wrote an unauthorised article accusing the police of bias.
The Prime Minister and his team are continuing to look into how edits Number 10 demanded be made to the Home Secretary’s draft piece for The Times were not included in the final version.
On Friday, Jeremy Hunt became the most senior Cabinet minister to distance himself from Mrs Braverman’s rhetoric, saying he would not have said “the words that she used”.
There were fresh Tory calls for her to go, with Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, a Conservative MP, arguing that if Mrs Braverman did not agree to be less publicly critical of the police she should be moved.
But supporters on the Tory benches were also becoming more vocal, including David TC Davies, the Welsh Secretary, and Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary.
A Cabinet minister told The Telegraph they believed the Prime Minister had decided against a “summary sacking” of Mrs Braverman, a position echoed by Number 10 insiders.
Amid continued speculation about if and when a cabinet reshuffle could take place, some government figures suggested it could be delayed until after Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision on the Government’s Rwanda deportation scheme.
For the second day running, Downing Street refused to publicly say whether Mr Sunak had talked to Mrs Braverman about her Times piece on the police’s handling of protests.
But The Telegraph understands that the Prime Minister has been in touch with Mrs Braverman as Number 10 tries to get to the bottom of what happened. How the PM has communicated with the Home Secretary and what exactly was discussed is unclear. By 9pm on Friday no sacking had been announced.
Row continues over article
Mrs Braverman spent a large part of Thursday in hospital by the side of a close family member who was undergoing an operation. She was at home on Friday.
The row centres on an article in The Times published online on Wednesday evening in which Mrs Braverman accused police officers of showing bias in how they handled different demonstrations.
She wrote protests must be policed “even-handedly”, adding: “Unfortunately, there is a perception that senior police officers play favourites when it comes to protesters.
“During Covid, why was it that lockdown objectors were given no quarter by public order police yet Black Lives Matters demonstrators were enabled, allowed to break rules and even greeted with officers taking the knee?”
The article piled pressure on the Metropolitan Police ahead of the pro-Palestine march on Armistice Day in London and came just hours after Mr Sunak had defended the right for people to protest.
It then emerged that Number 10 had demanded some lines of Mrs Braverman’s article were rewritten before publication, but the requested edits were not incorporated.
Debates about who would replace Mrs Braverman should she be moved from the Home Office by Mr Sunak are playing out in private among Tory MPs and advisers.
Potential home secretaries
Robert Jenrick, the immigration minister, Oliver Dowden, the Deputy prime minister, Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, and Victoria Atkins, the financial secretary, have been named as possible successors in the speculation.
Mrs Braverman’s article and the implication on her Cabinet future has split Tory MPs, with moderates calling for a sacking and figures on the Right rallying to her side.
Mr Hunt distanced himself from the Home Secretary’s remarks. He said: “As many other Cabinet ministers have said, the words that she used are not words that I myself would have used.
“But I have a productive relationship with her as a colleague and I have always given her the money that she needs to fund the police, bring down crime and to fund the immigration and asylum system.”
He added: “The Prime Minister has said that he has full confidence in her and I have nothing further to add.”
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the 1922 Committee treasurer, said Mr Sunak should have a “very serious conversation” with Mrs Braverman to make sure she changes her behaviour or “possibly consider it is time for her to move to another job in the Cabinet”.
But Mr Davies said Mrs Braverman should stay in position because “police don’t always get it right”, adding: “I have read the article and I didn’t read it the way everyone else seems to have done.”
Sir Jacob said: “The Home Secretary has said what many people are thinking and the calls to sack her seem to be disproportionate because whether she’s broken the ministerial code or not is something of a moot point.”
No comments:
Post a Comment