Share this post:
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has shamefully branded pro-Palestinian protests “un-British” in the wake of the Manchester synagogue attack in which two Jewish men were killed.
She said demonstrators should “step back” from planned marches, claiming it would be disrespectful to victims’ families.
This is wrong on several counts: her words were stigmatising, insulting and undemocratic.
By calling pro-Palestinian protests “un-British” in the aftermath of the Manchester attack, Mahmood is in effect linking peaceful protestors to terrorism.
That’s collective blame, and it mirrors exactly the mistake extremists make when they conflate “all Jews” with the actions of the Israeli military.
Both are rooted in racism.
Labelling a protest as “un-British” is not a neutral comment — it’s a way of saying that people who oppose the government’s line don’t belong in the national community.
In a democracy, that is extremely dangerous.
If anything, it is profoundly British to march against state violence and injustice — whether in the UK or abroad.
This framing also erases the fact that many Jews in the UK and worldwide are strongly opposed to the assault on Gaza.
Groups like Jewish Voice for Peace, Na’amod, and others have been marching alongside pro-Palestinian campaigners.
Mahmood’s remarks risk painting them as somehow “un-British” too — when in fact they are exercising exactly the freedoms that underpin UK democracy.
Her argument sets up a dangerous binary: either you sympathise with UK Jewish victims of terror or you sympathise with Palestinians.
That is a lie.
One can mourn Adrian Daulby and Melvin Cravitz, condemn anti-Semitism in all its forms, and oppose the mass killing of civilians in Gaza.
In fact, a decent society demands that we do all three.
Finally, Mahmood is positioning herself as “tough” by scapegoating protesters.
It’s cheap politics: rather than talking about how radicalisation happens or how communities can be protected, she is turning the focus onto visible, noisy demonstrators — because cracking down on marches is cheaper and easier than tackling extremism at its roots.
If this is how the new Home Secretary proposes to behave, she will disgrace that great office of state.
A minister who truly cared about preventing future attacks would confront the causes of radicalisation and division – not demonise those who march for peace and justice.
We are all endangered when ministers treat grief as a political weapon and dissent as a crime.
Share this post:
Like this:
Like Loading...
Mahmood smears pro-Palestine protests as ‘un-British’ after Manchester attack
Share this post:
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has shamefully branded pro-Palestinian protests “un-British” in the wake of the Manchester synagogue attack in which two Jewish men were killed.
She said demonstrators should “step back” from planned marches, claiming it would be disrespectful to victims’ families.
This is wrong on several counts: her words were stigmatising, insulting and undemocratic.
By calling pro-Palestinian protests “un-British” in the aftermath of the Manchester attack, Mahmood is in effect linking peaceful protestors to terrorism.
That’s collective blame, and it mirrors exactly the mistake extremists make when they conflate “all Jews” with the actions of the Israeli military.
Both are rooted in racism.
Labelling a protest as “un-British” is not a neutral comment — it’s a way of saying that people who oppose the government’s line don’t belong in the national community.
In a democracy, that is extremely dangerous.
If anything, it is profoundly British to march against state violence and injustice — whether in the UK or abroad.
This framing also erases the fact that many Jews in the UK and worldwide are strongly opposed to the assault on Gaza.
Groups like Jewish Voice for Peace, Na’amod, and others have been marching alongside pro-Palestinian campaigners.
Mahmood’s remarks risk painting them as somehow “un-British” too — when in fact they are exercising exactly the freedoms that underpin UK democracy.
Her argument sets up a dangerous binary: either you sympathise with UK Jewish victims of terror or you sympathise with Palestinians.
That is a lie.
One can mourn Adrian Daulby and Melvin Cravitz, condemn anti-Semitism in all its forms, and oppose the mass killing of civilians in Gaza.
In fact, a decent society demands that we do all three.
Finally, Mahmood is positioning herself as “tough” by scapegoating protesters.
It’s cheap politics: rather than talking about how radicalisation happens or how communities can be protected, she is turning the focus onto visible, noisy demonstrators — because cracking down on marches is cheaper and easier than tackling extremism at its roots.
If this is how the new Home Secretary proposes to behave, she will disgrace that great office of state.
A minister who truly cared about preventing future attacks would confront the causes of radicalisation and division – not demonise those who march for peace and justice.
We are all endangered when ministers treat grief as a political weapon and dissent as a crime.
Share this post:
Like this:
you might also like
Police State Britain: Tories would arrest you for looking at them in a funny way
Like this:
The security services are already snooping on us – why aren’t we out in the streets about it?
Like this:
See if YOUR objection is mentioned in the Surveillance Bill debate!
Like this:
Like this: