Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy " Quite honestly what did these idiots expect. A proscribed organisation and hold up placards expressing support. The mind absolutely boggles. If they had not been arrested then the questions would be why not. Most are or will be bailed. Just a question now of what they use as a defence and what sentences are handed to them | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.." But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat." The word I would attribute to the comparison is 'yet'.. For any government to not take an attack upon elements of it's defense capability would be a dereliction of its duty to the nation.. And the usual suspects would no doubt be outraged.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I absolutely think we should throw the book at the vandals of the planes…. But I don’t know how this government are going to square recognition of Palestine potential statehood next month, whilst still calling Palestine action a prescribed terrorist organisation " Trying to be neutral as possible. Depending on your point of view. Promoting the recognition of Palestine is laudable. Denouncing a terrorist organisation that may support the former is also laudable. The two are not mutually exclusive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat." They caused more than disruption in the past, they have hit police officers and members of the public with sledgehammers, they are violent and have threatened people and businesses. They threatened to continue vandalism of military targets and violence towards businesses and individuals if the government didn't change policy. That was the stepping stone in to being proscribed, along with vandalism of the planes rotas / engine, not just the widely reported paint. That is a significant step up from sitting in a road. The supporters of the group are supporting violence and government intimidation, regardless of their age, and peaceful protests. I do wonder what happened to their common sense, if they can organise those protests why don't they form a group to get their message across? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat. They caused more than disruption in the past, they have hit police officers and members of the public with sledgehammers, they are violent and have threatened people and businesses. They threatened to continue vandalism of military targets and violence towards businesses and individuals if the government didn't change policy. That was the stepping stone in to being proscribed, along with vandalism of the planes rotas / engine, not just the widely reported paint. That is a significant step up from sitting in a road. The supporters of the group are supporting violence and government intimidation, regardless of their age, and peaceful protests. I do wonder what happened to their common sense, if they can organise those protests why don't they form a group to get their message across? " Back in the day the Animal Liberation Front did much the same, as have many organisations down the years. There are plenty of laws in place to deal with those actions. You mention criminal damage for example. The step to proscribe this group seems entirely political to me, rather than based on a fear of actual terrorist acts (of which there have been none). We should all be careful of allowing the government to do this, what ever our political stance, or feelings about this group. There has been a definite slide towards more authoritarian policy from both this government and the previous. It is not healthy for democracy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat. They caused more than disruption in the past, they have hit police officers and members of the public with sledgehammers, they are violent and have threatened people and businesses. They threatened to continue vandalism of military targets and violence towards businesses and individuals if the government didn't change policy. That was the stepping stone in to being proscribed, along with vandalism of the planes rotas / engine, not just the widely reported paint. That is a significant step up from sitting in a road. The supporters of the group are supporting violence and government intimidation, regardless of their age, and peaceful protests. I do wonder what happened to their common sense, if they can organise those protests why don't they form a group to get their message across? Back in the day the Animal Liberation Front did much the same, as have many organisations down the years. There are plenty of laws in place to deal with those actions. You mention criminal damage for example. The step to proscribe this group seems entirely political to me, rather than based on a fear of actual terrorist acts (of which there have been none). We should all be careful of allowing the government to do this, what ever our political stance, or feelings about this group. There has been a definite slide towards more authoritarian policy from both this government and the previous. It is not healthy for democracy." They actually met the threshold to be proscribed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat. They caused more than disruption in the past, they have hit police officers and members of the public with sledgehammers, they are violent and have threatened people and businesses. They threatened to continue vandalism of military targets and violence towards businesses and individuals if the government didn't change policy. That was the stepping stone in to being proscribed, along with vandalism of the planes rotas / engine, not just the widely reported paint. That is a significant step up from sitting in a road. The supporters of the group are supporting violence and government intimidation, regardless of their age, and peaceful protests. I do wonder what happened to their common sense, if they can organise those protests why don't they form a group to get their message across? Back in the day the Animal Liberation Front did much the same, as have many organisations down the years. There are plenty of laws in place to deal with those actions. You mention criminal damage for example. The step to proscribe this group seems entirely political to me, rather than based on a fear of actual terrorist acts (of which there have been none). We should all be careful of allowing the government to do this, what ever our political stance, or feelings about this group. There has been a definite slide towards more authoritarian policy from both this government and the previous. It is not healthy for democracy. They actually met the threshold to be proscribed. " That's quite difficult to do, as there is no threshold as such. The actual requirement is for the Home Secretary to "believe" they are "concerned in terrorism". If all that is required is belief, then no organisation is safe from proscription. It'll be the RNLI next... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let’s hope justice is quick and harsh and they go away for a long time. The British streets and people will be safer with these scumbags in jail." Let's say my prediction is right and the protest continues so we end up with say 2,000 OAPs charged with terrorism offences. It will be interesting to see how the prison service copes with locking up thousands of elderly "scumbags" many with complex health issues. I guess they'll have to release other prisoners to make room. It could be interesting to see how the Daily Mail deal with that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy " The government made a bad call to prescribe PA as a terrorist organisation. They should have gone much harder, but against the criminal elements individually. They're now in a lose/lose situation. That's not too say that the government could've or shouldn't prescribe them, necessarily, but in practical terms, it was probably a mistake. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let’s hope justice is quick and harsh and they go away for a long time. The British streets and people will be safer with these scumbags in jail. Let's say my prediction is right and the protest continues so we end up with say 2,000 OAPs charged with terrorism offences. It will be interesting to see how the prison service copes with locking up thousands of elderly "scumbags" many with complex health issues. I guess they'll have to release other prisoners to make room. It could be interesting to see how the Daily Mail deal with that." If they have room for those on the right they should have room for those on the left. But let’s see. I think we all know what will happen tho. Conditional discharge | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they have room for those on the right they should have room for those on the left. But let’s see. I think we all know what will happen tho. Conditional discharge" How many on the right are in prison? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they have room for those on the right they should have room for those on the left. But let’s see. I think we all know what will happen tho. Conditional discharge How many on the right are in prison?" No idea. But if the number is more than 2 then they have room. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat. They caused more than disruption in the past, they have hit police officers and members of the public with sledgehammers, they are violent and have threatened people and businesses. They threatened to continue vandalism of military targets and violence towards businesses and individuals if the government didn't change policy. That was the stepping stone in to being proscribed, along with vandalism of the planes rotas / engine, not just the widely reported paint. That is a significant step up from sitting in a road. The supporters of the group are supporting violence and government intimidation, regardless of their age, and peaceful protests. I do wonder what happened to their common sense, if they can organise those protests why don't they form a group to get their message across? Back in the day the Animal Liberation Front did much the same, as have many organisations down the years. There are plenty of laws in place to deal with those actions. You mention criminal damage for example. The step to proscribe this group seems entirely political to me, rather than based on a fear of actual terrorist acts (of which there have been none). We should all be careful of allowing the government to do this, what ever our political stance, or feelings about this group. There has been a definite slide towards more authoritarian policy from both this government and the previous. It is not healthy for democracy. They actually met the threshold to be proscribed. That's quite difficult to do, as there is no threshold as such. The actual requirement is for the Home Secretary to "believe" they are "concerned in terrorism". If all that is required is belief, then no organisation is safe from proscription. It'll be the RNLI next..." There is a legal threshold under the Terrorism Act 2000 that must be met for a group to be proscribed. Once met parliament vote on it, in this case they voted to proscribe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let’s hope justice is quick and harsh and they go away for a long time. The British streets and people will be safer with these scumbags in jail. Let's say my prediction is right and the protest continues so we end up with say 2,000 OAPs charged with terrorism offences. It will be interesting to see how the prison service copes with locking up thousands of elderly "scumbags" many with complex health issues. I guess they'll have to release other prisoners to make room. It could be interesting to see how the Daily Mail deal with that." Unfortunately a large number of these white middle class “protestors” seem to think they are above the law. They do what they like and then think that because they are affluent and middle class they will get off. I’m afraid unfortunately that will probably the case particularly when faced with magistrates and judges who think that these protestors “speak the same language”. Not so of course some working class oik who’s got a bit angry about stuff on Facebook. The courts need to make it absolutely clear that nobody is above the law. I may be wrong but I think the maximum sentence is seven years. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat. They caused more than disruption in the past, they have hit police officers and members of the public with sledgehammers, they are violent and have threatened people and businesses. They threatened to continue vandalism of military targets and violence towards businesses and individuals if the government didn't change policy. That was the stepping stone in to being proscribed, along with vandalism of the planes rotas / engine, not just the widely reported paint. That is a significant step up from sitting in a road. The supporters of the group are supporting violence and government intimidation, regardless of their age, and peaceful protests. I do wonder what happened to their common sense, if they can organise those protests why don't they form a group to get their message across? Back in the day the Animal Liberation Front did much the same, as have many organisations down the years. There are plenty of laws in place to deal with those actions. You mention criminal damage for example. The step to proscribe this group seems entirely political to me, rather than based on a fear of actual terrorist acts (of which there have been none). We should all be careful of allowing the government to do this, what ever our political stance, or feelings about this group. There has been a definite slide towards more authoritarian policy from both this government and the previous. It is not healthy for democracy. They actually met the threshold to be proscribed. That's quite difficult to do, as there is no threshold as such. The actual requirement is for the Home Secretary to "believe" they are "concerned in terrorism". If all that is required is belief, then no organisation is safe from proscription. It'll be the RNLI next... There is a legal threshold under the Terrorism Act 2000 that must be met for a group to be proscribed. Once met parliament vote on it, in this case they voted to proscribe. " ...as I said, the only threshold is "the Home Secretary believes" not exactly an easy metric for the rest of us to verify. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Unfortunately a large number of these white middle class “protestors” seem to think they are above the law. They do what they like and then think that because they are affluent and middle class they will get off. I’m afraid unfortunately that will probably the case particularly when faced with magistrates and judges who think that these protestors “speak the same language”. Not so of course some working class oik who’s got a bit angry about stuff on Facebook. The courts need to make it absolutely clear that nobody is above the law. I may be wrong but I think the maximum sentence is seven years." I think most of the protesters are fully aware of the risks. That's why so many of them are over 50, because they no longer have family responsibilities and if they get banged up for several years it wouldn't directly affect their loved ones. And it probably will lead to prison sentences because there'll be a number of them who will reoffend multiple times. Although of course there is a judicial review of the proscription's legality so this might all go away. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. But there has to be a level playing field. Extinction Rebellion have caused a lot more disruption and criminal damage but have not faced the same sanctions. This leaves an uneasy feeling that banning Palestine Action is politically motivated. That's completely unacceptable and now labour are feeling the heat. They caused more than disruption in the past, they have hit police officers and members of the public with sledgehammers, they are violent and have threatened people and businesses. They threatened to continue vandalism of military targets and violence towards businesses and individuals if the government didn't change policy. That was the stepping stone in to being proscribed, along with vandalism of the planes rotas / engine, not just the widely reported paint. That is a significant step up from sitting in a road. The supporters of the group are supporting violence and government intimidation, regardless of their age, and peaceful protests. I do wonder what happened to their common sense, if they can organise those protests why don't they form a group to get their message across? Back in the day the Animal Liberation Front did much the same, as have many organisations down the years. There are plenty of laws in place to deal with those actions. You mention criminal damage for example. The step to proscribe this group seems entirely political to me, rather than based on a fear of actual terrorist acts (of which there have been none). We should all be careful of allowing the government to do this, what ever our political stance, or feelings about this group. There has been a definite slide towards more authoritarian policy from both this government and the previous. It is not healthy for democracy. They actually met the threshold to be proscribed. That's quite difficult to do, as there is no threshold as such. The actual requirement is for the Home Secretary to "believe" they are "concerned in terrorism". If all that is required is belief, then no organisation is safe from proscription. It'll be the RNLI next... There is a legal threshold under the Terrorism Act 2000 that must be met for a group to be proscribed. Once met parliament vote on it, in this case they voted to proscribe. ...as I said, the only threshold is "the Home Secretary believes" not exactly an easy metric for the rest of us to verify." It goes to yours and every others MP to verify. If you are not happy with the way your MP voted you can and should pick that up with them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy " Firstly Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law for what they now have been per scribed as a terror group for. Secondly Sir Keir Starmer defended Palestine Action and he won as they were found not guilty due to wait for it to have taken action to prevent a bigger crime. This was found by 12 of their peers in a British court. But you all put down these court records because the MSM tell you so, in fact the MSM haven't even told you because they know you won't even bother to look it up. Every politician now knows if you take them on then they can now make you a terrorists. Just a footnote the police charge auditors with section 42 of the terror act for filming outside a police station which is a lawful activity, eventually the government had to cancel section 42 of this act as it was found the police over used their powers. People get what they ask for but the masses against the change are those effected by the change. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy Firstly Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law for what they now have been per scribed as a terror group for. Secondly Sir Keir Starmer defended Palestine Action and he won as they were found not guilty due to wait for it to have taken action to prevent a bigger crime. This was found by 12 of their peers in a British court. But you all put down these court records because the MSM tell you so, in fact the MSM haven't even told you because they know you won't even bother to look it up. Every politician now knows if you take them on then they can now make you a terrorists. Just a footnote the police charge auditors with section 42 of the terror act for filming outside a police station which is a lawful activity, eventually the government had to cancel section 42 of this act as it was found the police over used their powers. People get what they ask for but the masses against the change are those effected by the change. " Not taking sides in this but Courts are used to prosecute people, not organisations. How were, as you put it, "Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law"? If it was an incident, then who in particular was prosecuted and for what? It would help to clarify your argument. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy Firstly Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law for what they now have been per scribed as a terror group for. Secondly Sir Keir Starmer defended Palestine Action and he won as they were found not guilty due to wait for it to have taken action to prevent a bigger crime. This was found by 12 of their peers in a British court. But you all put down these court records because the MSM tell you so, in fact the MSM haven't even told you because they know you won't even bother to look it up. Every politician now knows if you take them on then they can now make you a terrorists. Just a footnote the police charge auditors with section 42 of the terror act for filming outside a police station which is a lawful activity, eventually the government had to cancel section 42 of this act as it was found the police over used their powers. People get what they ask for but the masses against the change are those effected by the change. Not taking sides in this but Courts are used to prosecute people, not organisations. How were, as you put it, "Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law"? If it was an incident, then who in particular was prosecuted and for what? It would help to clarify your argument. " You could do as I did read what you read and then look it up, I will not do it for you. This is what I mean people look to discredit me not even bothering to look up if that I wrote is true. Just discredit me with no point of view of there own, go away you stupid man. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer defended the Fairford Five who broke into RAF Fairford, not Palestine Action." Point taken, but he defended a group of people taking action what would be considered terrorist if taken in the contest of this discussion? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy Firstly Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law for what they now have been per scribed as a terror group for. Secondly Sir Keir Starmer defended Palestine Action and he won as they were found not guilty due to wait for it to have taken action to prevent a bigger crime. This was found by 12 of their peers in a British court. But you all put down these court records because the MSM tell you so, in fact the MSM haven't even told you because they know you won't even bother to look it up. Every politician now knows if you take them on then they can now make you a terrorists. Just a footnote the police charge auditors with section 42 of the terror act for filming outside a police station which is a lawful activity, eventually the government had to cancel section 42 of this act as it was found the police over used their powers. People get what they ask for but the masses against the change are those effected by the change. Not taking sides in this but Courts are used to prosecute people, not organisations. How were, as you put it, "Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law"? If it was an incident, then who in particular was prosecuted and for what? It would help to clarify your argument. You could do as I did read what you read and then look it up, I will not do it for you. This is what I mean people look to discredit me not even bothering to look up if that I wrote is true. Just discredit me with no point of view of there own, go away you stupid man." I actually tried to look it up. I couldn't find very much at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Point taken, but he defended a group of people taking action what would be considered terrorist if taken in the contest of this discussion?" Agreed, I just wanted to improve the accuracy of the discussion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Point taken, but he defended a group of people taking action what would be considered terrorist if taken in the contest of this discussion? Agreed, I just wanted to improve the accuracy of the discussion." yep no problem. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They could have still protested in support of Palestine without showing support for Palestine action, the group. About whether proscribing Palestine action as a terrorist organisation was the right move, most people point out their attack on the RAF base. That was definitely bad. But I believe there is more to it than meets the eye. Labour is losing a lot of support over this. They wouldn't have taken this decision lightly. My guess is that they got more information from intelligence, which they don't want to expose publicly. " Yes, all they had to do was hold placards without "action" " I'm against genocide, I support Palestine " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer defended the Fairford Five who broke into RAF Fairford, not Palestine Action. Point taken, but he defended a group of people taking action what would be considered terrorist if taken in the contest of this discussion?" But looked the other way when SAS operatives in Afghanistan repeatedly killed detainees and unarmed men in suspicious circumstances (BBC investigation). Uk military reports suggest that one unit may have unlawfully killed 54 people in one six-month tour. The BBC found evidence suggesting the former head of special forces failed to pass on evidence to a murder inquiry. Nobody prosecuted for murder, but Palestine Action spray painting becomes a terrorist offence. Double standards. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy " For the vandalism of the planes, I agree they should face maximum penalties. For the demonstration I would say it depends on if they knew that what they were doing was illegal to and carried severe consequences. It appears the group in question had been in the press a fair bit so I feel it's difficult to claim ignorance but that may be their best defense. Not sure why the age is mentioned | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer defended the Fairford Five who broke into RAF Fairford, not Palestine Action." the occassions that you are thinking of were direct actions by the Ploughshares Group. if you google Seeds of Hope Ploughshares Group you'll find lots of information on the Warton Four, Trident Ploughshares, Sam Walton & Dan Woodhouse and the Pitstop Ploughshares who carried out an action in Ireland. In all instances over the last 3 decades, all defendants were aquitted by jury. if the D | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let’s hope justice is quick and harsh and they go away for a long time. The British streets and people will be safer with these scumbags in jail." "Let's say my prediction is right and the protest continues so we end up with say 2,000 OAPs charged with terrorism offences. It will be interesting to see how the prison service copes with locking up thousands of elderly "scumbags" many with complex health issues. I guess they'll have to release other prisoners to make room. It could be interesting to see how the Daily Mail deal with that." I very much doubt any of them will go to jail. They'll probably end up with a suspended sentence and a small fine. But with a new conviction for a terrorist offence on their records, I hope none of them were planning on taking any foreign holidays for the rest of their lives. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let’s hope justice is quick and harsh and they go away for a long time. The British streets and people will be safer with these scumbags in jail. Let's say my prediction is right and the protest continues so we end up with say 2,000 OAPs charged with terrorism offences. It will be interesting to see how the prison service copes with locking up thousands of elderly "scumbags" many with complex health issues. I guess they'll have to release other prisoners to make room. It could be interesting to see how the Daily Mail deal with that. I very much doubt any of them will go to jail. They'll probably end up with a suspended sentence and a small fine. But with a new conviction for a terrorist offence on their records, I hope none of them were planning on taking any foreign holidays for the rest of their lives." Yes questioning free speech will mean a freedom to travel so keep your mouth shut and do not question your government actions or you may suffer the same fate. Do what he says and keep traveling iit is the right thing to do right? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They actually met the threshold to be proscribed." "That's quite difficult to do, as there is no threshold as such. The actual requirement is for the Home Secretary to "believe" they are "concerned in terrorism"." The Terrorism Act 2000 lays out the things that the Home Secretary should consider. Terrorism is defined as "using violence or threats to influence the government or intimidate the public for political, religious, racial, or ideological causes". PA certainly meet that. It "must involve serious violence against a person or serious damage to property". I'd say a million pounds worth of damage counts as 'serious'. And it must be "designed to influence a government, international organization, or to intimidate the public". That's them again. The real issue is that they announced that they wouldn't stop and would continue with more action until the government changed their mind. It's hard for the Home Secretary to not believe that these are people that will cause serious damage, for political reasons, to influence the government. While it feels like overkill to me, the law is very clear, and PA have put themselves on the wrong side of it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But with a new conviction for a terrorist offence on their records, I hope none of them were planning on taking any foreign holidays for the rest of their lives." "Yes questioning free speech will mean a freedom to travel so keep your mouth shut and do not question your government actions or you may suffer the same fate." None of the people arrested were questioning free speech, or criticising the government. They held up signs that said "I support Palestine Action", which is clearly supporting a group which has been proscribed under UK law. If you held up a sign saying "I support Al Quaida" you'd be arrested for the same reason. Especially if you contacted the press beforehand and told them that you were going to do so. This isn't the government cracking down on dissent. The law is clear, everybody knows it, and the police can't just let people break the law with impugnity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But with a new conviction for a terrorist offence on their records, I hope none of them were planning on taking any foreign holidays for the rest of their lives. Yes questioning free speech will mean a freedom to travel so keep your mouth shut and do not question your government actions or you may suffer the same fate. None of the people arrested were questioning free speech, or criticising the government. They held up signs that said "I support Palestine Action", which is clearly supporting a group which has been proscribed under UK law. If you held up a sign saying "I support Al Quaida" you'd be arrested for the same reason. Especially if you contacted the press beforehand and told them that you were going to do so. This isn't the government cracking down on dissent. The law is clear, everybody knows it, and the police can't just let people break the law with impugnity." This.. That people can't actually see the difference in what has been passed by Cooper and free speech which still exists is puzzling.. The protesters being arrested are being used by PA and their voices about the wrongs in Gaza will have less impact because if their naivety.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They actually met the threshold to be proscribed. That's quite difficult to do, as there is no threshold as such. The actual requirement is for the Home Secretary to "believe" they are "concerned in terrorism". The Terrorism Act 2000 lays out the things that the Home Secretary should consider. Terrorism is defined as "using violence or threats to influence the government or intimidate the public for political, religious, racial, or ideological causes". PA certainly meet that. It "must involve serious violence against a person or serious damage to property". I'd say a million pounds worth of damage counts as 'serious'. And it must be "designed to influence a government, international organization, or to intimidate the public". That's them again. The real issue is that they announced that they wouldn't stop and would continue with more action until the government changed their mind. It's hard for the Home Secretary to not believe that these are people that will cause serious damage, for political reasons, to influence the government. While it feels like overkill to me, the law is very clear, and PA have put themselves on the wrong side of it." I Who makes the law you? Course not, you have to agree, you agree with what suites you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But with a new conviction for a terrorist offence on their records, I hope none of them were planning on taking any foreign holidays for the rest of their lives. Yes questioning free speech will mean a freedom to travel so keep your mouth shut and do not question your government actions or you may suffer the same fate. None of the people arrested were questioning free speech, or criticising the government. They held up signs that said "I support Palestine Action", which is clearly supporting a group which has been proscribed under UK law. If you held up a sign saying "I support Al Quaida" you'd be arrested for the same reason. Especially if you contacted the press beforehand and told them that you were going to do so. This isn't the government cracking down on dissent. The law is clear, everybody knows it, and the police can't just let people break the law with impugnity. This.. That people can't actually see the difference in what has been passed by Cooper and free speech which still exists is puzzling.. The protesters being arrested are being used by PA and their voices about the wrongs in Gaza will have less impact because if their naivety.." Remember to speak against Israel is to what anti semitic is you cannot speak against them or risk being called anti this or that once we pass that barrier then we will see the truth. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But with a new conviction for a terrorist offence on their records, I hope none of them were planning on taking any foreign holidays for the rest of their lives. Yes questioning free speech will mean a freedom to travel so keep your mouth shut and do not question your government actions or you may suffer the same fate. None of the people arrested were questioning free speech, or criticising the government. They held up signs that said "I support Palestine Action", which is clearly supporting a group which has been proscribed under UK law. If you held up a sign saying "I support Al Quaida" you'd be arrested for the same reason. Especially if you contacted the press beforehand and told them that you were going to do so. This isn't the government cracking down on dissent. The law is clear, everybody knows it, and the police can't just let people break the law with impugnity. This.. That people can't actually see the difference in what has been passed by Cooper and free speech which still exists is puzzling.. The protesters being arrested are being used by PA and their voices about the wrongs in Gaza will have less impact because if their naivety.. Remember to speak against Israel is to what anti semitic is you cannot speak against them or risk being called anti this or that once we pass that barrier then we will see the truth." No we can and have criticised on here the actions of the Israeli state, that is not anti Semitic.. Many in Israel are equally critical too.. Ditto criticism of Hamas is not criticism of all Palestinians | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy Firstly Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law for what they now have been per scribed as a terror group for. Secondly Sir Keir Starmer defended Palestine Action and he won as they were found not guilty due to wait for it to have taken action to prevent a bigger crime. This was found by 12 of their peers in a British court. But you all put down these court records because the MSM tell you so, in fact the MSM haven't even told you because they know you won't even bother to look it up. Every politician now knows if you take them on then they can now make you a terrorists. Just a footnote the police charge auditors with section 42 of the terror act for filming outside a police station which is a lawful activity, eventually the government had to cancel section 42 of this act as it was found the police over used their powers. People get what they ask for but the masses against the change are those effected by the change. " I think it was section 44 rather than 42 but it’s kinda irrelevant because the police now use section 43 in exactly the same way and have been taken to court so many times of it’s improper use and they seem to loose every time. But that’s a whole other subject | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy Firstly Palestine Action have been found not guilty on many occasions in a court of law for what they now have been per scribed as a terror group for. Secondly Sir Keir Starmer defended Palestine Action and he won as they were found not guilty due to wait for it to have taken action to prevent a bigger crime. This was found by 12 of their peers in a British court. But you all put down these court records because the MSM tell you so, in fact the MSM haven't even told you because they know you won't even bother to look it up. Every politician now knows if you take them on then they can now make you a terrorists. Just a footnote the police charge auditors with section 42 of the terror act for filming outside a police station which is a lawful activity, eventually the government had to cancel section 42 of this act as it was found the police over used their powers. People get what they ask for but the masses against the change are those effected by the change. I think it was section 44 rather than 42 but it’s kinda irrelevant because the police now use section 43 in exactly the same way and have been taken to court so many times of it’s improper use and they seem to loose every time. But that’s a whole other subject " Cannot disagree things haven't changed regarding the police, ive seen the auditors who proved through video evidence that the police corrupted the law through misuse. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I fear that the bulk of these protesters, being middle aged (or older), middle class folk, are just being used as "useful idiots" (to quote Hamas). Their kids aren't going to be too impressed when they want to take grandma and grandad along with them on a nice family Florida holiday, only to find their patents no longer qualify for a US visa waiver, or be able to get a full visa due to their terrorism conviction. " Seems like you want to put older people away in a corner somewhere out the road. So many condescending presumptions about their mental state and priorities in life. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Seems like you want to put older people away in a corner somewhere out the road. So many condescending presumptions about their mental state and priorities in life." Quite surprised that you would read it that way, but hey, whatever. I'm not here to fall out with anyone. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I fear that the bulk of these protesters, being middle aged (or older), middle class folk, are just being used as "useful idiots" (to quote Hamas). Their kids aren't going to be too impressed when they want to take grandma and grandad along with them on a nice family Florida holiday, only to find their patents no longer qualify for a US visa waiver, or be able to get a full visa due to their terrorism conviction. Seems like you want to put older people away in a corner somewhere out the road. So many condescending presumptions about their mental state and priorities in life." Quite right to question these peoples motives. If they are supporting the people of Palestine or if the are supporting a proscribed terrorist group. If it is the latter I think we could all agree their judgement is going to be brought into question. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I fear that the bulk of these protesters, being middle aged (or older), middle class folk, are just being used as "useful idiots" (to quote Hamas). Their kids aren't going to be too impressed when they want to take grandma and grandad along with them on a nice family Florida holiday, only to find their patents no longer qualify for a US visa waiver, or be able to get a full visa due to their terrorism conviction. Seems like you want to put older people away in a corner somewhere out the road. So many condescending presumptions about their mental state and priorities in life. Quite right to question these peoples motives. If they are supporting the people of Palestine or if the are supporting a proscribed terrorist group. If it is the latter I think we could all agree their judgement is going to be brought into question." It is of course.. I think there's a mixture of naivety and a lack of information about the proscription if what's been hinted at by Cooper has weight about PA emerges once the court cases conclude plus the widely shared outrage about the innocents in Gaza.. Most of the people arrested were 60 plus, will like many of us lived through domestic terrorism here in their lives so I'm doubtful they support Hamas in itself.. Said previously that they by being goaded by PA to defy the proscription and rightly arrested they are being played and in many ways their protest is diluted by this.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I fear that the bulk of these protesters, being middle aged (or older), middle class folk, are just being used as "useful idiots" (to quote Hamas). Their kids aren't going to be too impressed when they want to take grandma and grandad along with them on a nice family Florida holiday, only to find their patents no longer qualify for a US visa waiver, or be able to get a full visa due to their terrorism conviction. Seems like you want to put older people away in a corner somewhere out the road. So many condescending presumptions about their mental state and priorities in life. Quite right to question these peoples motives. If they are supporting the people of Palestine or if the are supporting a proscribed terrorist group. If it is the latter I think we could all agree their judgement is going to be brought into question. It is of course.. I think there's a mixture of naivety and a lack of information about the proscription if what's been hinted at by Cooper has weight about PA emerges once the court cases conclude plus the widely shared outrage about the innocents in Gaza.. Most of the people arrested were 60 plus, will like many of us lived through domestic terrorism here in their lives so I'm doubtful they support Hamas in itself.. Said previously that they by being goaded by PA to defy the proscription and rightly arrested they are being played and in many ways their protest is diluted by this.." They are being played everyday, we all are and it is more than evident on the many Israel / Hamas threads. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I fear that the bulk of these protesters, being middle aged (or older), middle class folk, are just being used as "useful idiots" (to quote Hamas). Their kids aren't going to be too impressed when they want to take grandma and grandad along with them on a nice family Florida holiday, only to find their patents no longer qualify for a US visa waiver, or be able to get a full visa due to their terrorism conviction. Seems like you want to put older people away in a corner somewhere out the road. So many condescending presumptions about their mental state and priorities in life. Quite right to question these peoples motives. If they are supporting the people of Palestine or if the are supporting a proscribed terrorist group. If it is the latter I think we could all agree their judgement is going to be brought into question. It is of course.. I think there's a mixture of naivety and a lack of information about the proscription if what's been hinted at by Cooper has weight about PA emerges once the court cases conclude plus the widely shared outrage about the innocents in Gaza.. Most of the people arrested were 60 plus, will like many of us lived through domestic terrorism here in their lives so I'm doubtful they support Hamas in itself.. Said previously that they by being goaded by PA to defy the proscription and rightly arrested they are being played and in many ways their protest is diluted by this.." Age isn’t relevant to the question of whether they broke the law or not. The law doesn’t say “you can’t steal except if you are over 60 in which case do what you like”. Sinwar himself was in his late fifties on October 7th. Who knows what’s going on in these PA supporters’ minds. Hopefully they will be locked up for a long time to protect us all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I fear that the bulk of these protesters, being middle aged (or older), middle class folk, are just being used as "useful idiots" (to quote Hamas). Their kids aren't going to be too impressed when they want to take grandma and grandad along with them on a nice family Florida holiday, only to find their patents no longer qualify for a US visa waiver, or be able to get a full visa due to their terrorism conviction. Seems like you want to put older people away in a corner somewhere out the road. So many condescending presumptions about their mental state and priorities in life. Quite right to question these peoples motives. If they are supporting the people of Palestine or if the are supporting a proscribed terrorist group. If it is the latter I think we could all agree their judgement is going to be brought into question. It is of course.. I think there's a mixture of naivety and a lack of information about the proscription if what's been hinted at by Cooper has weight about PA emerges once the court cases conclude plus the widely shared outrage about the innocents in Gaza.. Most of the people arrested were 60 plus, will like many of us lived through domestic terrorism here in their lives so I'm doubtful they support Hamas in itself.. Said previously that they by being goaded by PA to defy the proscription and rightly arrested they are being played and in many ways their protest is diluted by this.. Age isn’t relevant to the question of whether they broke the law or not. The law doesn’t say “you can’t steal except if you are over 60 in which case do what you like”. Sinwar himself was in his late fifties on October 7th. Who knows what’s going on in these PA supporters’ minds. Hopefully they will be locked up for a long time to protect us all." It's totally relevant to the point I addressed which you've missed.. If you seriously think you or we as a society are at threat from a totally peaceful protest whom when arrested didn't resist that we saw on Saturday that's odd.. The ones who have have carried out direct actions involving criminal behaviours and an assault are the ones to be wary off.. You won't see them arrested for just sitting outside Parliament.. They broke the law and should be dealt with accordingly, they won't be locked up by this or the last lot for what took place.. Repeated infringements however will be dealt with more severely.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s interesting that certain terrorist groups seem to be able to be supported publicly and others aren’t. I’m not sure if this is because they are more clever in their wording or it’s just the demographics of the supporters. " Which proscribed groups can be openly supported? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s interesting that certain terrorist groups seem to be able to be supported publicly and others aren’t. I’m not sure if this is because they are more clever in their wording or it’s just the demographics of the supporters. Which proscribed groups can be openly supported?" Hamas flags fly in anti Isreal protests That hook bloke regularly spoke supporting Al Qaeda for years before anything was done | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s interesting that certain terrorist groups seem to be able to be supported publicly and others aren’t. I’m not sure if this is because they are more clever in their wording or it’s just the demographics of the supporters. Which proscribed groups can be openly supported? Hamas flags fly in anti Isreal protests That hook bloke regularly spoke supporting Al Qaeda for years before anything was done " And there are plenty of reported arrests for supporting Hamas. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wish if a person or group of people were messing with the narrative I am peddling, in this case why I am supporting the mass killing of a certain population or populations. And this person or persons were highlighting how I am killing or helping to kill a population slowly and in mass. That would piss me off, I want to be a statesman a leader of the people I cannot have some person or persons messing with that, but hey I am in power I make the laws, so I am going to outlaw them, and use MSM to prove my point. I will give out a phrase "Political Policing" I think the best example of this is the miners strike. Palestine action have been found not guilty due to their actions due to their actions prevented a bigger crime on occasion by 12 of their peers. Palestine action have caused no violence, they have caused destruction to property and business to highlight their involvement with mass killing. but when people protested against the council tax bill they smashed up London, every Saturday town centres were damaged due to football fans. If anyone disputes this no violence claim then provide proof please. To protest is not a crime, especially when one has support to protest in numbers. To me this should worry us all it is another freedom in the process of being taken away, another narrative to divide us. " I'm not sure why you think Palestine action have not been violent... Are you genuinely unaware that Palestine action have been violent, they attacked police officers and security guards with sledgehammers, whips and chains. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Looking at the death toll it should be Israel branded as the terrorist organisation. Dwarfs Hamas by 60 to 1 " Not condoning anything by anyone, but out of interest....if you poked a lion with a stick, would you expect the lion to find a similar stick to poke you back with equal force.....or would you expect the lion to rip you to shreds ? Point being, Hamas must surely have known they were going to receive payback on a humongous scale, more than enough to discourage them to ever do it again. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Point being, Hamas must surely have known they were going to receive payback on a humongous scale, more than enough to discourage them to ever do it again." That's what Hamas wanted to happen. Their Iranian paymasters didn't like the fact that Saudi Arabia and Israel were talking about the sort of normalisation that could eventually lead to a genuine peace deal. They needed Hamas to do something to derail that. They probably didn't expect it to go quite so well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'Palestine Action activist hit officer with hammer' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo I wonder how many more of those "I support Palestine Action" protests we'll see now that the details are coming out." Apparently before their website was shut down, the person who used the hammer was described as a "political prisoner"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'Palestine Action activist hit officer with hammer' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo I wonder how many more of those "I support Palestine Action" protests we'll see now that the details are coming out. Apparently before their website was shut down, the person who used the hammer was described as a "political prisoner" "Found not guilty today by Jury in Bristol, despite being on film smashing terrified police officer with sledgehammer. Mob rule, but only for one type of mob. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'Palestine Action activist hit officer with hammer' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo I wonder how many more of those "I support Palestine Action" protests we'll see now that the details are coming out." Probably celebrating now a Jury has found its legal to attack police officers with sledgehammers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'Palestine Action activist hit officer with hammer' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo I wonder how many more of those "I support Palestine Action" protests we'll see now that the details are coming out. Apparently before their website was shut down, the person who used the hammer was described as a "political prisoner"
Found not guilty today by Jury in Bristol, despite being on film smashing terrified police officer with sledgehammer.
Mob rule, but only for one type of mob."Have you seen the full video, i.e. the one show in court not the one release by the police prior to the trial? It was a security guard swinging the sledgehammer. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'Palestine Action activist hit officer with hammer' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo I wonder how many more of those "I support Palestine Action" protests we'll see now that the details are coming out. Apparently before their website was shut down, the person who used the hammer was described as a "political prisoner"
Found not guilty today by Jury in Bristol, despite being on film smashing terrified police officer with sledgehammer.
Mob rule, but only for one type of mob.
Have you seen the full video, i.e. the one show in court not the one release by the police prior to the trial?
It was a security guard swinging the sledgehammer."BS.. The video clearly shows the woman in the red jumpsuit hitting the police officer at least twice with the sledge hammer.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'Palestine Action activist hit officer with hammer' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo I wonder how many more of those "I support Palestine Action" protests we'll see now that the details are coming out. Apparently before their website was shut down, the person who used the hammer was described as a "political prisoner"
Found not guilty today by Jury in Bristol, despite being on film smashing terrified police officer with sledgehammer.
Mob rule, but only for one type of mob.
Have you seen the full video, i.e. the one show in court not the one release by the police prior to the trial?
It was a security guard swinging the sledgehammer.
BS..
The video clearly shows the woman in the red jumpsuit hitting the police officer at least twice with the sledge hammer.."But if you play it backwards she assaults the protesters with her back.🤦♂️ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The pendulum swings. Once upon a time, juries in the deep South in the USA used to find black people guilty on flimsy evidence. Now juries in the UK find violent (can't call them) criminals not guilty on damning evidence. It's the rules, we accept it's how the law presently works. But perhaps this is a wake-up call to reexamine how juries operate. Let's see what the politicians do with this." Hopefully a retrial on at least some charges. Parts of London are known for their unconventional jury verdicts ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'Palestine Action activist hit officer with hammer' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo I wonder how many more of those "I support Palestine Action" protests we'll see now that the details are coming out. Apparently before their website was shut down, the person who used the hammer was described as a "political prisoner"
Found not guilty today by Jury in Bristol, despite being on film smashing terrified police officer with sledgehammer.
Mob rule, but only for one type of mob."https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9wxlv99xrjo They were found not guilty only for burglary. The jury hasn't reached a verdict on criminal damage and violent disorder. If they were found not guilty on these counts too, this country is cooked. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'Palestine Action activist hit officer with hammer' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo I wonder how many more of those "I support Palestine Action" protests we'll see now that the details are coming out. Apparently before their website was shut down, the person who used the hammer was described as a "political prisoner"
Found not guilty today by Jury in Bristol, despite being on film smashing terrified police officer with sledgehammer.
Mob rule, but only for one type of mob.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9wxlv99xrjo
They were found not guilty only for burglary.
The jury hasn't reached a verdict on criminal damage and violent disorder. If they were found not guilty on these counts too, this country is cooked."The jury was unable to reach a verdict on the ABH charge of one defendant. It's on video him hitting a police office full force with a sledge hammer.... This brings the concept of trial jury to a worrying place.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The pendulum swings. Once upon a time, juries in the deep South in the USA used to find black people guilty on flimsy evidence. Now juries in the UK find violent (can't call them) criminals not guilty on damning evidence. It's the rules, we accept it's how the law presently works. But perhaps this is a wake-up call to reexamine how juries operate. Let's see what the politicians do with this." In a homogeneous society the concept of trail by Jury works. Not so much when its not and in-group preferences start to emerge. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The lad who fractured the police woman's spine with a sledgehammer has been kept in custody. Sadly for him, his face has been plastered everywhere and there are quite a few folks who are bigger than him willing to say more than hello. These 'protesters' are vermin pure and simple." That's good news  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today?" The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today?" Moral superiority has been questioned now though hasn't it. I do find some of the earlier jury decisions or lack of intresting. I wish we were allowed to hear the evidence alot of the time. High Court saves us as a nation on a regular basis... And yet the gov still authorise action they know they'll get dragged for in a year or two.. They benifit in the mean time and get a load of people on board their train.. Divide and concur the fact the country split over PA is still horrifying to me but there we go. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.." Just on the attack of a plane, they should be prosecuted under the air navigation order, if possible. If guilty, jail term and an undisclosed fine. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today?" A bit rich, with how quite some of the labour threads have been with the noticeable absence of meny frequent posters.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. Just on the attack of a plane, they should be prosecuted under the air navigation order, if possible. If guilty, jail term and an undisclosed fine." Entering a military Base and sabotaging a military aircraft really did cross a line in my opinion.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. Just on the attack of a plane, they should be prosecuted under the air navigation order, if possible. If guilty, jail term and an undisclosed fine." I think military craft are only covered by the air navigation order when being piloted by a civilian. This plane was parked up on military land. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. Just on the attack of a plane, they should be prosecuted under the air navigation order, if possible. If guilty, jail term and an undisclosed fine. Entering a military Base and sabotaging a military aircraft really did cross a line in my opinion.." But those planes were being used to inform the perpetrators of a genocide... Nothing to do with our safety as a nation | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today? The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder." More over reach by the courts more like it. It is institutional antisemitism at its worst. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But those planes were being used to inform the perpetrators of a genocide... Nothing to do with our safety as a nation" Even if that were true, damaging those planes would mean that we're unable to use them to gather information for ourselves. That means we have less information, and harms our safety. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today? The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder. More over reach by the courts more like it. It is institutional antisemitism at its worst." Why is it over reach? A challenge was mounted, the High Court looked at it, and decided that PA shouldn’t be proscribed a terrorist group? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today? The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder. More over reach by the courts more like it. It is institutional antisemitism at its worst. Why is it over reach? A challenge was mounted, the High Court looked at it, and decided that PA shouldn’t be proscribed a terrorist group?" Because it is an opinion that “the very high bar” has not been reached. However the actions of this group are by any reasonable metric the acts of terrorists and therefore the proscription was entirely justified. This is just one example of the biased justice system in this country. Not convicting those who broke into a drone factory and broke a policewoman’s back with a sledgehammer is another example. However, say a word out of place on social media and, provided that you are the wife of a tory, you get years in prison. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today? The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder. More over reach by the courts more like it. It is institutional antisemitism at its worst. Why is it over reach? A challenge was mounted, the High Court looked at it, and decided that PA shouldn’t be proscribed a terrorist group? Because it is an opinion that “the very high bar” has not been reached. However the actions of this group are by any reasonable metric the acts of terrorists and therefore the proscription was entirely justified. This is just one example of the biased justice system in this country. Not convicting those who broke into a drone factory and broke a policewoman’s back with a sledgehammer is another example. However, say a word out of place on social media and, provided that you are the wife of a tory, you get years in prison." Quite a bit to unpack there. Can’t it be that the judge’s interpreted the law , and came to the conclusion that the Government had got this wrong? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today? The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder. More over reach by the courts more like it. It is institutional antisemitism at its worst. Why is it over reach? A challenge was mounted, the High Court looked at it, and decided that PA shouldn’t be proscribed a terrorist group? Because it is an opinion that “the very high bar” has not been reached. However the actions of this group are by any reasonable metric the acts of terrorists and therefore the proscription was entirely justified. This is just one example of the biased justice system in this country. Not convicting those who broke into a drone factory and broke a policewoman’s back with a sledgehammer is another example. However, say a word out of place on social media and, provided that you are the wife of a tory, you get years in prison." There is a legal precedent that protects those protestors in law. In the 1980’s protestors were tried for trespass and criminal damage at Greenham Common. The defence won its case based on the principle that civil disobedience for conscientious reasons has a long-standing history and should be recognised in legal contexts. The defending barrister who made that case was Keir Starmer. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They called for the mass protests because they knew what the outcome would be and how it would look.. Fact is they crossed a line with the attack on the planes (I think there have been other acts of criminal damage).. Now they're using this tactic to garner sympathy etc and hope public opinion goes against the government, in my opinion it would be a mistake to remove what has been put in place as they will only continue direct actions and when we are looking at National security etc that can't happen.. Just on the attack of a plane, they should be prosecuted under the air navigation order, if possible. If guilty, jail term and an undisclosed fine. Entering a military Base and sabotaging a military aircraft really did cross a line in my opinion.. But those planes were being used to inform the perpetrators of a genocide... Nothing to do with our safety as a nation" No they weren't and what if there was a national emergency and they where desperately needed for a vital mission? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today? The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder. More over reach by the courts more like it. It is institutional antisemitism at its worst. Why is it over reach? A challenge was mounted, the High Court looked at it, and decided that PA shouldn’t be proscribed a terrorist group? Because it is an opinion that “the very high bar” has not been reached. However the actions of this group are by any reasonable metric the acts of terrorists and therefore the proscription was entirely justified. This is just one example of the biased justice system in this country. Not convicting those who broke into a drone factory and broke a policewoman’s back with a sledgehammer is another example. However, say a word out of place on social media and, provided that you are the wife of a tory, you get years in prison. There is a legal precedent that protects those protestors in law. In the 1980’s protestors were tried for trespass and criminal damage at Greenham Common. The defence won its case based on the principle that civil disobedience for conscientious reasons has a long-standing history and should be recognised in legal contexts. The defending barrister who made that case was Keir Starmer." Nonsense. In 1980 Starmer was still doing his A levels. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today? The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder. More over reach by the courts more like it. It is institutional antisemitism at its worst. Why is it over reach? A challenge was mounted, the High Court looked at it, and decided that PA shouldn’t be proscribed a terrorist group? Because it is an opinion that “the very high bar” has not been reached. However the actions of this group are by any reasonable metric the acts of terrorists and therefore the proscription was entirely justified. This is just one example of the biased justice system in this country. Not convicting those who broke into a drone factory and broke a policewoman’s back with a sledgehammer is another example. However, say a word out of place on social media and, provided that you are the wife of a tory, you get years in prison. There is a legal precedent that protects those protestors in law. In the 1980’s protestors were tried for trespass and criminal damage at Greenham Common. The defence won its case based on the principle that civil disobedience for conscientious reasons has a long-standing history and should be recognised in legal contexts. The defending barrister who made that case was Keir Starmer." Wow ! A defending barrister in his late teens / early 20s I guess law degrees must have been easier then 🤷♂️ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not many comments on here, considering the High Court judgement today? The right decision I think. Another Govt blunder. More over reach by the courts more like it. It is institutional antisemitism at its worst. Why is it over reach? A challenge was mounted, the High Court looked at it, and decided that PA shouldn’t be proscribed a terrorist group? Because it is an opinion that “the very high bar” has not been reached. However the actions of this group are by any reasonable metric the acts of terrorists and therefore the proscription was entirely justified. This is just one example of the biased justice system in this country. Not convicting those who broke into a drone factory and broke a policewoman’s back with a sledgehammer is another example. However, say a word out of place on social media and, provided that you are the wife of a tory, you get years in prison. There is a legal precedent that protects those protestors in law. In the 1980’s protestors were tried for trespass and criminal damage at Greenham Common. The defence won its case based on the principle that civil disobedience for conscientious reasons has a long-standing history and should be recognised in legal contexts. The defending barrister who made that case was Keir Starmer. Wow ! A defending barrister in his late teens / early 20s I guess law degrees must have been easier then 🤷♂️" I stand corrected. My confusion was Starmer used the Greenham common precedent to defend Greenpeace activists in 2007. Cheers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy The government made a bad call to prescribe PA as a terrorist organisation. They should have gone much harder, but against the criminal elements individually. They're now in a lose/lose situation. That's not to say that the government couldn't or shouldn't proscribe them, necessarily, but in practical terms, it was probably a mistake." Today's decision was correct and the group should never have been proscribed for being a terrorist organisation in the first place. Criminal does not equal terrorist. And now many will see a vindication of people subjected to a terrorist label as absolution for their vile criminal behaviour. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy The government made a bad call to prescribe PA as a terrorist organisation. They should have gone much harder, but against the criminal elements individually. They're now in a lose/lose situation. That's not to say that the government couldn't or shouldn't proscribe them, necessarily, but in practical terms, it was probably a mistake. Today's decision was correct and the group should never have been proscribed for being a terrorist organisation in the first place. Criminal does not equal terrorist. And now many will see a vindication of people subjected to a terrorist label as absolution for their vile criminal behaviour." I believe there actions do fall with in the scope of the terrorism act 2000, if you read it. We will have to wait and say what the supreme court rules. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy The government made a bad call to prescribe PA as a terrorist organisation. They should have gone much harder, but against the criminal elements individually. They're now in a lose/lose situation. That's not to say that the government couldn't or shouldn't proscribe them, necessarily, but in practical terms, it was probably a mistake. Today's decision was correct and the group should never have been proscribed for being a terrorist organisation in the first place. Criminal does not equal terrorist. And now many will see a vindication of people subjected to a terrorist label as absolution for their vile criminal behaviour." vile? criminal? emotive language to provoke a reaction as you put it previously  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So over 550 people were arrested at the protest in London over the weekend Basically the police are not denying that the protest was very peaceful … I fact the average age of the person arrested was late 50’s Basically any who held up a placard saying “I am against genocide, I support Palestine action “ was arrested … and now can be charged with terror offences The police has their hands tied I am absolutely against the vandalism of the planes, throw the book at them .. but this feels so uneasy The government made a bad call to prescribe PA as a terrorist organisation. They should have gone much harder, but against the criminal elements individually. They're now in a lose/lose situation. That's not to say that the government couldn't or shouldn't proscribe them, necessarily, but in practical terms, it was probably a mistake. Today's decision was correct and the group should never have been proscribed for being a terrorist organisation in the first place. Criminal does not equal terrorist. And now many will see a vindication of people subjected to a terrorist label as absolution for their vile criminal behaviour." I agree with the latter statement, and hold the judgement of the appeal accountable, however I would challenge the idea that the group should not have been proscribed at all. When an organised group breaks into a sovereign military base and sabotages essential equipment with demands on the government, the have stepped over a line. We either defend our line or allow the line to be moved, which is what has happened in this case. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Home Secretary messed up. Had they been tried for criminal damage they would be serving time. The court rejected the proscription partly because the Home Secretary chose not to use existing criminal law. " The people that entered the RAF base and damaged military aircraft, spray paint was the headline however they used crowbars and other items to damage the engines, were charged under criminal laws their trials are yet to start. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Today's decision was correct and the group should never have been proscribed for being a terrorist organisation in the first place. Criminal does not equal terrorist. And now many will see a vindication of people subjected to a terrorist label as absolution for their vile criminal behaviour. vile? criminal? emotive language to provoke a reaction as you put it previously "Are you suggesting that no member of Palestine Action has committed vile and criminal acts in their name? To be clear, the average member is not at all criminal, vile or a terrorist. Some, however, are vile and criminal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I agree with the latter statement, and hold the judgement of the appeal accountable, however I would challenge the idea that the group should not have been proscribed at all. When an organised group breaks into a sovereign military base and sabotages essential equipment with demands on the government, the have stepped over a line. We either defend our line or allow the line to be moved, which is what has happened in this case. " Whereas it might have been technically correct, it was politically stupid (to go down the terrorism path) and there are better avenues of prosecution. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I agree with the latter statement, and hold the judgement of the appeal accountable, however I would challenge the idea that the group should not have been proscribed at all. When an organised group breaks into a sovereign military base and sabotages essential equipment with demands on the government, the have stepped over a line. We either defend our line or allow the line to be moved, which is what has happened in this case. Whereas it might have been technically correct, it was politically stupid (to go down the terrorism path) and there are better avenues of prosecution." I'm not sure that it was politically stupid. The group had become dangerous through their actions, and were attracting support even though their methods included attacking police officers with sledgehammers and damaging military equipment. The group were and still are dangerous, what interested me was the lack of an alternative group being formed, when logic says there was room for a less violent group. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not sure that it was politically stupid. The group had become dangerous through their actions, and were attracting support even though their methods included attacking police officers with sledgehammers and damaging military equipment. The group were and still are dangerous, what interested me was the lack of an alternative group being formed, when logic says there was room for a less violent group." There is room for a less violent group, but the majority of their supporters don't know that they are violent. Even today there are people claiming that the person weilding the sledgehammer was a security guard and the protestors weren't involved with injuring the police officer. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
