Back on 26th December 2025 ‘The J.CA’ published an article about a so-called ‘anti-Semitic hate crime’ in London, England that local jews were ‘extremely upset’ about.
In order to understand how ludicrous the claim being made is I have quoted their article at length below:
‘A senior member of the London Assembly has written an urgent letter to the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, calling for immediate action over a poster displayed in a London shop window that he says incites hatred and violence against Jews.
Alex Wilson, the Leader of the Reform UK London Assembly Group, said the poster was brought to his attention by a Jewish constituent who felt threatened and distressed by its public display. The image, shown in the window of the Islamic Human Rights Commission shop on Preston Road in northwest London, features the words “Intifada Street” alongside artwork that Wilson said appears to depict a Hamas terrorist.
In a letter dated Dec. 24, 2025, addressed to Sir Mark Rowley, Wilson expressed concern that the Metropolitan Police Service declined to take further action after reviewing the complaint.
“I write to you concerning the disturbing experience of a Jewish constituent,” Wilson wrote. He said the constituent contacted police in September and reported feeling that the poster “incited hatred towards Jews.”
Wilson said that after what he described as a prolonged period of police inaction, the matter was only revisited following an email campaign. Even then, he wrote, the outcome left the constituent alarmed.
According to Wilson, an inspector from Colindale Police Station told the complainant that “Intifada Street,” despite its meaning and historical context, was considered merely the artist’s company name and therefore not subject to further action.
Jewish community leaders say the term “intifada” is widely understood in the context of violent campaigns against Israeli civilians and Jews, including suicide bombings, shootings, and stabbings. They argue that its use in public messaging directed at Jewish neighborhoods or businesses cannot be separated from that history.
Wilson’s letter points to what he described as a clear inconsistency in police enforcement. Only days earlier, the Metropolitan Police and Greater Manchester Police publicly stated that the “context had changed” following the Bondi Beach massacre and that chants calling to “globalise the intifada” would now be treated as potentially criminal.
“Yet it appears your organisation is failing to take action on a poster on display using precisely the same language,” Wilson wrote.
He further criticized what he called “mental gymnastics” by police in explaining away the term, comparing it to past controversies in which authorities suggested that words such as “jihad” could have benign meanings despite common usage in violent extremist contexts.
“My Jewish friends and colleagues point out to me that the word ‘intifada’ has an unambiguous meaning,” Wilson wrote. “It means kill all the Jews.”
The letter also references recent terrorism cases, including the convictions of Walid Saadaoui and Amar Hussein, which prosecutors said demonstrated how calls for intifada can translate into real world violence against Jewish targets.
Wilson said the Preston Road shop displaying the poster is located next to a Jewish bakery, a fact he described as particularly troubling. He warned that allowing such imagery to remain on display risks emboldening extremists and further alienating Jewish residents.
Jewish organizations in London echoed those concerns, saying the case highlights a broader pattern of perceived double standards in policing antisemitism. Community representatives stressed that antisemitism should be assessed based on how it is reasonably understood by those targeted, not solely on narrow or technical interpretations.
The Metropolitan Police Service has not publicly commented on the specific complaint. In general guidance, the Met says it assesses allegations of hate incidents and hate crimes based on evidence, context, and relevant law.’ (1)
For the record this is the alleged ‘anti-Semitic poster’ concerned:
Now despite Wilson (and ‘the local jewish community’s’) kvetching that ‘Intifada’ means ‘kill the jews’; this is complete and utter made-up nonsense. Since the Arabic word ‘Intifada’ simply means ‘uprising’ and while it is most famously used in the context of the two Palestinian ‘Intifadas’ against Israel (1987-1993 and 2000-2005). It is often used outside of that context with other prominent ‘Intifadas’ being the Iraqi Intifada of 1952 against the Hashemite monarchy of Iraq and the Zemla Intifada in Morocco against the Spanish in 1970.
The point being the word ‘Intifada’ doesn’t mean anything different in English than the other slogans/words on the poster like ‘Fight the Power’, ‘Resistance’ and ‘Revolution’ so Wilson’s (and ‘the local jewish community’s’) claims that it means ‘kill the jews’ is frankly transparently in the same way that claiming jews singing the Hatikvah really means ‘kill the goyim’ (despite the fact that the Hatikvah is actually violently anti-gentile) would be. (2)
The fact remains that what is going on here is that jews are trying to ‘re-interpret’ the meaning of the word ‘Intifada’ to mean ‘kill the jews’ rather than its actual meaning of a general ‘uprising’ – much as they have been trying to re-define the term ‘anti-Semitism’ to include criticism of Israel/Zionism via the IHRA ‘definition of anti-Semitism’ – and also trying to use that claim to render any anti-Zionist sentiment as ‘anti-Semitism’ and thus ‘not free speech’ and liable to be classified as ‘hate speech’.
That Wilson is aware of what he is doing (and why) is made obvious in ‘The J.CA’s’ article when they write that:
‘Wilson said he is not calling for censorship but for consistency and equal application of the law. “When police say context matters, it must matter for Jews as well,” he said.
He urged the commissioner to review the decision and to take action “at the earliest opportunity,” warning that continued inaction risks undermining confidence among Jewish Londoners.
As antisemitism remains a major concern across the United Kingdom, Jewish leaders say the case underscores the need for clear standards and decisive enforcement when language associated with violence is displayed in public spaces.’ (3)
Basically, he is protesting that ‘I am not calling for censorship’ while calling for censorship because calling for censorship is not a good PR look for Wilson or the Reform Party.
It is classic chutzpah where jews try to tell you that the sky is in fact green because they say it is not because it actually is because you believing the sky is green benefits (or is perceived to benefit) them in some way.
So thus, we can see this both indicate that the Reform Party has been captured by jews – and probably was since its inception – and is being utilized by them to promote their agenda and that this is yet another instance of a confirmed ‘anti-Semitic hate crime’ hoax.
References
(1) https://thej.ca/2025/12/26/london-assembly-member-urges-police-action-over-poster-allegedly-inciting-murder-of-jews/
(2) On this see my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/is-the-hatikvah-racist
(3) https://thej.ca/2025/12/26/london-assembly-member-urges-police-action-over-poster-allegedly-inciting-murder-of-jews/
Karl’s SubstackRead More
R1
T1
