Europe

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] geissi@feddit.de 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Sorry, but I couldn't find a single reference to "Jews against genocide" in any of these.
Also, open letters and opinion peaces by activists are by definition not neutral sources.

I'm not saying that police are necessarily acting correctly, but do you have any evidence that someone was arrested for “Jews against genocide”?

parent

https://twitter.com/derJamesJackson/status/1741488229201658142

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/10/germany-gaza-protests-crackdown

The problem is that German mainstream media is not covering these topics and had a ridicilous pro Israel bias until the last few weeks since it becomes impossible to ignore the deliberate starvation of people in Gaza and the continued genocidal rethoric of the Israeli government in regards to invading Rafah.

parent

[–] geissi@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

The problem is that German mainstream media is not covering these topics

Well English media don't seem to provide any proof for the original claim either.

Your first link shows a picture of a lady with a “Jews against genocide” sign flanked by two police officers.
I see no arrest and at least at that moment in time she is still allowed to show her sign.

Link two contains these passages:

Her banner, which said she was ashamed to be German and that there was a “genocide” taking place in the densely populated Palestinian enclave being bombarded by Israel.
Police let her and her sign go, and she joined the march.

At about 4pm, police pushed into the crowd and, to calls of “shame, shame”, pulled Monika Kalinowska out.
Her sign, written in red, read, “Israel is a terrorist state.”
After she was frisked and her identification checked, she was told there was nothing wrong with her sign – even though it was confiscated – and she was allowed to leave. She could pick up the sign the next day, police said.

Again, I'm not defending police here but the claim was that people were arrested, so I want to know who got arrested and for what?

parent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrest

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

An arrest is the act of apprehending and taking a person into custody (legal protection or control), usually because the person has been suspected of or observed committing a crime. After being taken into custody, the person can be questioned further and/or charged. An arrest is a procedure in a criminal justice system, sometimes it is also done after a court warrant for the arrest.

I think you might confuse it with detention, where the police would keep you in jail for a limited time.

As for who and what, from the article:

The officer who briefly removed Kalinowska from the protest told Al Jazeera that there was no formal list or any particular guidelines to follow.

“Really, I just use my intuition,” he said. “If I see something I think is bad, we go and get it.”

And this is indivative of the wider problem here. Police can harass and attack protests without having to uphold a legal standard. So even if there is no legal basis to what they do, just storming into the protest and dragging someone out is used as an intimidation and punishment without crime tactic. It is always a violent act where not only the person apprehended, but also the protestors around them are physically attacked.

parent

[–] geissi@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago

I admit, it might be a language problem.

taking a person into custody (legal protection or control)

What does taking into custody mean then?
Is police taking someone aside for 2 minutes to ask some questions an arrest?
Because then I don't understand the outcry over it, particularly compared to far more heavy-handed police action that definitely does happen every now and again.

parent

[–] crispy_kilt@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Blogs, letters, and articles about letters are very weak sources. They're on the level of opinions. Do you have anything better?

parent

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

So you think the pictures and videos that show the speaking activist being detained by the Police have been staged with the police? You think that recognised organizations who rely on their tax exemption would make false allegations against the government that could deny their tax exempt status and practically kill their work through that?

parent

[–] crispy_kilt@feddit.de -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Pictures and videos are evidence of a single event each, not evidence of systematic opression

Any organisation can make statements which can be argued to be statements of principle, of opinion, or similar, and not face any consequences. Tax-exempt status is removed if they start working for profit, not if they work in the direction of their political beliefs.

parent

https://taz.de/Aberkennung-der-VVN-Gemeinnuetzigkeit/!5645383/

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

They can and will lose their tax exempt status or have it threatened if the government argues them to believe "extremist" for which false allegations would be an indication.

Losing the tax exempt status based on broad allegations have happened to the VVN-BdA the Association of people persecuted by the nazi regime, federation of antifascists. Based on it being mentioned in the "constitution protection report" of the interior intelligence in Bavaria the finance office of Berlin has revoked its tax exempt status in 2019. The organization was targeted as "leftist extremists" as they have a decisive anti-fascist stance, given that the organization has been founded by Holocaust survivors and their descendants are organized in it.

https://taz.de/VVN-BdA-wieder-voll-gemeinnuetzig/!5768978/

parent

[–] crispy_kilt@feddit.de -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

if the government argues them to believe “extremist”

Considering not even the openly neonazi AfD are classified as extremist they can feel quite safe from that. Also, well done moving the goalposts.

The fact remains that expressing statements furthering their political interests carries zero consequences. Which is a good thing, without this democracy wouldn't work. It also means that your sources are closer to opinions than to facts. Got any peer-reviewed studies perhaps?

parent

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

Considering not even the openly neonazi AfD are classified as extremist

except in many cases they are, and except the fact that this should be ringing alarm bells when left leaning organizations are targeted by the government. Taking their tax exempt status, like it was done with the VVN is a death sentence to non profit organizations.

Also how do you want to get peer reviewed studies about something that is happening right now and in that extent and with that attention since six months?

parent

[–] crispy_kilt@feddit.de -1 points 2 years ago

Yeah, only some of the Landesverbände, not the federal party - which is what really matters.

So would you say, there is as of yet insufficient evidence for a factual conclusion?