The moron, Yvette Cooper thinks that this is the sort of violent thug that needs to be locked up whilst neo nazi and other hate groups causing direct harm to (checks notes) voters continues unabated.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1536/cpsprodpb/8d95/live/2ee739a0-59ba-11f0-9074-8989d8c97d87.jpg.webp
Two neo-Nazi groups were proscribed at the same time…
There’s a palpable difference in daily harms to UK residents, whether physical or online.
Even if they were trying to use this sort of rule with wholesome intentions, I’m not sure how targeting groups by name instead of deed makes sense. It’s like doing a healthy diet by giving up Coca-Cola by name even though Pepsi and RC have the same nutritional profile and availability. Enjoy the Whack-a-mole game!
Taken to its logical conclusion, someone should start a pro-Palestinian squad and call it the Reform Party.
The group in question broke onto an airbase and put a couple of RAF planes out of action. They crossed a red line for the government.
Oh boy wait till you hear what the suffragettes were willing to do for another righteous cause, a bit over a century ago. I don’t know man, maybe the government should start reexamining its policies if ordinary people among its citizens are willing to start breaking into airbase and damaging their own planes.
They were willing to commit mass murder in London and Dublin, and to assassinate the Prime Minister. Also deeply keen on removing all Jews from the House of Commons. Things that today would indeed mark them as a terrorist organisation.
Later, Emmeline Pankhurst would found a political party with the aim of requiring all civil servants to prove their racial purity back at least 3 generations, and many of the more prominent members of the WSPU became prominent members of the British fascist movement, several being detained as a precaution during the second European fuss.
As a campaign, the WSPU was an abject failure. It put women’s votes back a decade, and Pankhurst failed to ensure that working class women were excluded from the franchise (she also wanted working class men excluded).
It was only a cataclysm the scale of WWI, and the groundwork of the suffragists working in opposition to the suffragettes, which brought votes for all.
Sounds like a classic case of both the moderates and the radicals being essential for any real change. The moderates are the hammer and the extremists are the anvil.
Society is like a bar of iron. It’s stuck in its shape and resists change. Non-violent moderate protest alone is like a hammer without an anvil. You strike the iron, but the iron ignores the blow. With moderate protest alone, the established powers simply ignore the protests. They bend and duck out of the way and nothing changes. But violent groups serve as the anvil. They hold the powers that be in place and prevent them from ducking away from the hammer blow of the moderates.
Both hammer and anvil are needed. Without the violent extremists, the moderates are simply painted as extremists and ignored. With them, the moderates can actually gain traction. Moderate protest movements don’t succeed unless there is also a violent wing. Moderates are only moderate if there is something to moderate against. Without the violent extremists, the moderates will be the ones labeled criminals and arrested, regardless of how extreme their tactics actually are.
The Suffragettes did nothing to advance the cause, quite the opposite. They poisoned centrist politicians against suffrage, confirmed the claims of the opponents talking about “mad women”, and made it hard for supporters of suffrage to make progress. On the other hand, they failed in their aims to hound out Jewish MPs from Parliament, and at the height of their bombing campaign Britain enjoyed the lowest insurance claim year in history.
It’s very likely women would have got the vote sooner if the militants just… didn’t. We’d be better off without immature hotheads spoiling for a bit of violence.
Removed by mod
Ah “liar”. They were tankers, not fighter jets. And paint thrown in an engine requires the engine to be completely stripped down for parts to be inspected and cleaned because it’s a plane not a lawnmower. They also went at the planes with a crowbar.
Nothing they did makes them terrorists, no matter what you think of the action they took
They caused £7 million pounds damage. Now if someone damaged YOUR property and the police did nothing how would you feel? As the £7 million will now have to be found from tax payers money can you not see why the government is pissed… regardless of the cause this sort of action has consequences.
if someone damaged YOUR property
I’m not supporting a genocide, why would someone damage my property?
If someone damaged my property, I’d feel pretty aggrieved… and it still wouldn’t make them a terrorist. And the police wouldn’t do nothing, because damaging property is a crime. That property being a few planes doesn’t magically change the equation. Just like the government wouldn’t be doing nothing if they hadn’t designated PA as a terrorist organisation, because a whole raft of criminal charges would still apply.
Literally, and I want to stress this, literally nobody has suggested that PA should not face appropriate and proportionate consequences for their actions. And you knew that. You knew damed well that people have no problem with the government taking action, as long as that action is legal and democratically responsible. Yet you deliberately chose to dishonestly equate opposition to terrorist designation with support for them getting off scot free, even though that’s an obviously false and mendacious equivalence.
You are not very skilled at this dishonesty malarkey. Consider yourself called out.
Eh? I never said that, I just said there are consequences and people are up in arms… You took what I said and ran with it. Should they do nothing about damage that tax payers will have to pay? Really should they? I never said it wasn’t terrorism either or in fact never said it wasn’t… I’m way more aggrieved they took the winter fuel payment away from my 82 yr old mother because it directly affects me. I was pointing out, simply, that it was £7 million pounds plus damages. 7 million. Tax payers will have to pay that somehow because that is how the military is funded, directly or indirectly. Now consider yourself being called out for trying to shame me when I was just saying it is a large figure - nothing more, nothing less. Whether I feel it is proportional or not is not what I meant and you damn well know it as well, you are just as guilty of what you accuse me of. Go try and shame someone else
Nobody said there shouldn’t be consequences, but they have been labeled as terrorists, which is not a fair or correct response.
And… I never said anything about that. If you do something, there are consequences. Those consequences vary but when it is a large sum of money quite often the consequences are disproportionate to the crime (and we can all agree it is a crime, in the literal sense)
So in other words you had nothing to add to what we were actually talking about and decided you wanted to talk about something else instead?
out of action
paint
Paint and crowbars. The engines will have to be stripped down and rebuilt.
Removed by mod
Still not terrorism
An attack on military assets for a political aim.
No , terrorism is targetting civilians for political aim
So the beheading of Lee Rigby wasn’t terrorism? Your definition doesn’t match the law or the dictionary.
What this has to do with palestine action?
In 2003, anti-war activists broke into RAF Fairford to stop US bombers heading to Iraq and didn’t get any terrorism charge. It’s pretty clear that it’s all about crushing real actions against genocide
That’s over 20 years ago, before 7/7 changed strategy.
So, not terrorism
Uk has the obligation to stop all military cooperation with israel that’s the big crimes that people involved in should be in jail for up to 15 years
They could just say I support Palestine and be fine.
But then they won’t be able to impress their basement friends with their edginess.
The Brits need to make like the French and lop heads off until they have something resembling a functional democracy.
Yeah interesting how our first attempt at democracy. Was started by and failed due to. Religious fundamentalism.
Given only wealthy land owners could vote. Hardly democracy.
Unfortunately France is only lagging behind, but on the same authoritarian path.
First thing done after terrorist attack: declare emergency state, a tool designed for cases where the state is at risk of collapsing because of invasion by a foreing country or violent insurrection…
The police gains the power to assign people considered at risk at their residence. Very first use: assign climate activists at residence during the COP.
Emergency state is reconducted multiple times without any rationale, other than vague “terrorist threat”.
One of the first actions from Macron once in power was to make it permanent, by passing its key elements in the law.
Protests against anti-social policies or for climate are now systematically met with a violent response. People come out with an eye or a hand missing due to flashballs and lacrymo grenades. Answer from the government is something like “they had it coming”.
Cases of activists and journalists intimidation by law enforcement are multiplying.
Give it a bit of time, and France will catch up.
And we should probably consider the very wealth as an aristocracy of sorts for that to be effective.
Palestine action? Never heard of them. We support Action for Palestinian.
Splitters
The People’s Front of Judea?
No, The Judean People’s Front.
The movie references the splintering of the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine).
- 1967 Palestinian Popular Struggle Front (PPSF)
- 1968 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC)
- 1969 Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP)
- 1972 Popular Revolutionary Front for the Liberation of Palestine
- The people’s front of Palestine AKA the Palestinians people’s front AKA… The name changes will cease when the facists stop being facist
I mean ok but the drafters of the Terrorism Act did think of that already, changing your name doesn’t get you out of anything. Both the IRA and National Front were forever peeling off into splinter groups with new names back in the 20th century.
How does that even work then, do they just decide what group you are supporting?
Pretty much, I mean that’s why we have judges, to look at all the facts of the case and make a decision on whether this is functionally the same group of people doing the same things as they were under another name. Legal loopholes aren’t as easy as some people think.
US does police state better.
US is Judge Dredd.
UK is 1984.
Apt considering the setting
Orwell was writing what he knew
Does it different. In the US the violence is more up front. Here it’s done through mechanisms of the state.
i bet my police state could beat up your police state
Germany does it the best
In Germany we are at a point where it’s difficult to identity antisemitism became everyone who doesn’t actively support the genocide in Gaza is called an antisemite
Removed by mod
They aren’t antisemites. They stand with Israel /s
Removed by mod
Same as everywhere else
…in the western power block, a relatively small portion of the world(despite ridiculously appropriating the name ’ intenational community ') that now has another good reason to be hated by the rest of the world.
Some Aussie comedian on KGB News has just said that the disabled should be shot or starved into work …but a few people holding signs is the problem. How baffling.
We’re they being serious? If so, please do share their name.
Also, do you mean 2GB?
Whole different line up on KGB radio I’d imagine haha
No, it’s a piss take name for GB News. Link to what I was on about.
Thanks for sending this through, I don’t think this guy is Australian though. Definitely not grown up here anyway.
What a fucking shit guy though.
Isn’t this a big part of the MAGA platform?
Probably. There are people here that love Trump/MAGA.
Even on the middle east eye YouTube I’m seeing so many appeals to authority and “it’s illegal, simple as. Full stop. Not for debate”.
Not sure if brigading or what but it really worries me how people think.
It’s not like they’re stupid, it’s like it’s uncomfortable for them to think.
Whomp… Whomp…! Unfortunately Fascism is real!
They’re feckless cowards.
As American, I’m always so glad to see our cousins across the water follow our inane footsteps. Cheers Brits!
Brexit? They were first.
Atleast we’re in solidarity about being fucked off
Cross Atlantic solidarity against fascism 🤝
Let’s hope the UK citizens prove less cowardly than the US ones.
Hollywood level politics. Just shut up
At least they have Corbyn daring to do what Sanders does not.
X to doubt. The UK threw out due process a long time ago, wave the ‘terrorism’ tag and egregiously Orwellian policies become law:
- Legalized warrantless arrest and imprisonment of suspects without trial or warrant for 28 days
- Permits freezing of a suspects assets without trial
- Allows unlimited imprisonment of foreigners suspected of terrorism without trial
- Military police permitted to operate on UK soil openly, even for non terrorism reasons
- TPIM orders without trial that permits electronic tagging, travel bans, limited house arrest, curfews and constant monitoring.
And all that’s before we even talk about the recent Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act nonsense.
Drawing attention to the abuse of these powers is now terrorism. Please hand yourself in to your nearest police station for reeducation.
The PAC are heroes. We should be building statues of them. No one a hundred years from now will think Labor is on the right side of history here. We should be nominating these people for sainthood, not criminalizing them.
The British haven’t been too good at protesting in the near past
Basically not since the 18th century really.
They used to be glorious though.
Ask your parents about the miners
They were far from effective.
Which is the point, the last time the UK protested in a big way people were brutally masacred by the government.
It was their last resort.
Eventually the regime won, but at the cost of really showing their true colors and who they stand with.
So the strikers were at least effective in that.
A lesson from history and for eternity.
They deserve respect and admiration.
Not every battle can be won, not every revolution succeeds.
But they can.
The only sure way to lose is to resign in your fate.Last effective protest was the women’s pay movement in 1968. Where all women at the factory strike. Plus many other female employees throughout the UK.
It was effective in that the law changed. Equal pay for women passed as a lawin 1971.
Question Then became is the legal requirements enough.
London really showed up for the Palestine protests a couple weeks ago
Arguably not in the recent past, but let us not forget that the suffragettes were very committed protesters. They did more than just organize symbolic protests though. They also carried out bombings and arson campaigns and one of them ended up cutting Winston Churchill’s face with a dogwhip.
Amongst other things, the Suffragettes attempted to bury 200 postal workers under the rubble of the biggest sorting office in London, attempted to flood a town by blowing up a canal embankment, left many bombs on commuter trains (now they have a TfL line named after them lol), attempted to kill the Prime Minister by burning down the packed theatre he was in, tried again by burning down his house, attacked MPs for being Jewish, and succeeded in murdering sailors in an attack on a naval dockyard.
And then much of the top echelons of the Suffragettes went on to be key members in British fascism, including one who became Mussolini’s pen-pal, another who became the registered owner of the bank account for the BUF, and another who was actually too anti-Semitic for Oswald Moseley, and denied the Holocaust happened because “there’s so many of them still around”.
The Suffragettes are always a bad example because they utterly failed in their stated aims (the height of their campaign of destruction ended up one of the years with the lowest insurance payouts in British history), went on to say and do horrific things, and there is a question as to how much of it was true commitment to a cause and how much it was people who got off on the violence.
I mean, half of the British population was living in a state of slavery. That is worth killing people over.
The Suffragettes are certainly a good counter-example. I didn’t mean that people haven’t been protesting, just that I can’t remember any recent protests (apart from strikes which are something different) where the government gave in and made concessions.
The government didn’t make concessions to the Suffragettes either. The WSPU was a total failure.
? They got the women’s vote
The Suffragists were a group of men and women including MPs who worked within the political system of peaceful negotiation and consensus-building over many years, and had made some gains.
The Suffragettes were a paramilitary organisation tightly controlled by Emmeline Pankhurst, and rejected the involvement of men (and working-class women).
The cause of women’s suffrage was advanced by the Suffragists, but once the Suffragettes started burning, bombing and racially harassing Jewish MPs, those gains were fatally undermined, and public opinion turned against women’s suffrage. In more than one occasion, entire towns turned out to burn down the local WSPU HQ as reprisal for a burned school, town hall or cricket pavilion. Red lines were crossed with the murder of two naval sailors and two attempts to assassinate the PM. If they’d had proscription then, they’d probably have used it.
Eventually Pankhurst lost interest, as her main passion was British imperialism and racial superiority, and her efforts pivoted towards press-ganging young men into the army and later entering very right-wing politics (not for nothing that many of the more famous suffragettes became fascists).
The cause was only revisited after WWI, based on the actions of women on the home front and the new demographic realities. It had little to do with the suffragettes who were still poorly received on either side.
It was a rewriting of history by a couple of propaganda books in the 1930s (largely ex-suffragettes trying to whitewash their crimes) that eventually led to the modern confusion between suffragettes and suffragists.
Only antisemites think genocide is bad. /s
Palestine Action are heroes. We should be singing songs about them, not prosecuting them.
Remember, legality and morality are only vaguely related. Beyond the natural crimes of murder, rape, etc. laws are just politics by another name. And the wealthy and powerful write laws to advance their own corrupt interests. Many moral obligations are criminalized, and many things that if there is a Hell will surely get you sent there are perfectly legal.
Those planes deserved to be vandalized. Hell, they deserved to be set on fire. It’s a shame they weren’t destroyed completely. If those planes are being used to carry out a genocide, then they should be destroyed. That is the simple absolute moral truth. If the law says otherwise, then the law is wrong. Anyone violating it still needs to keep the consequences in mind. But outside observers should not be afraid to speak truth to power. What Palestine Action did was not wrong; it was an act of heroism. The UK should be electing these people to parliament, not prosecuting them. Want courageous leaders who will actually stand up to powerful interests and do the right thing, even when it’s hard? Well it seems you just found that exact rare kind of person right here.
Destroying planes that are bound to assist in bombing in Gaza is simply the morally right thing to do, regardless of the law. It’s no different than a Jewish resistance fighter in the 1940s setting fire to a cattle train about to go collect prisoners for transport to Dachau. Sometimes destruction of government property is the only morally correct choice available to people.
And we shouldn’t be afraid to say this. People in the UK should be contacting their politicians demanding a full pardon for these heroes.
Those planes deserved to be vandalized. Hell, they deserved to be set on fire. It’s a shame they weren’t destroyed completely. If those planes are being used to carry out a genocide, then they should be destroyed.
The planes were totally unrelated to what’s going on in Gaza.
Destroying planes that are bound to assist in bombing in Gaza
What’s the indication these planes would do that? Israel doesn’t even need British tanker planes to fly the tiny distance to Gaza.
Sux
