• Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    111
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Just to be clear because everybody seems to be missing this point.

    Palestinian Action, is an organisation. Membership of that group is banned, it is not illegal to support Palestinians or to call out Israel’s genocide. The government doesn’t like it when you do, but it’s not actually illegal for you to do it.

    This organisation broke into a UK air force base in order to protest. They are not being charged because they protested, they’re being charged for breaking in and damaging a lot of military equipment. I think it’s a bit far to call them terrorists, but you can sort of see the government’s point, if you squint.

    The UK government does however absolutely deserve to get it in the neck for their support of Israel. Labour have had a pretty awkward relationship with Israel in particular and anti-Semitism in general for a long time, and they’re now keen to be seen as supporters, but there are limits.

    • JustTheWind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Thank you for this clarification. This is an extremely important context. “Palestine Action” is the particular name of a very specific organization, so the title of the article is obviously a bit misleading.

      Still very worrying and more than a bit concerning, though. Here’s to hoping for a future strengthening of UK speech laws. Though, frankly, I’m not so sure about US speech laws anymore. Cheers.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yes and I support that particular organization and the actions they perform. From what it sounds like reading the article, this very comment makes me a criminal in the UK

        God bless the first amendment 🦅🇺🇲

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t think it was ever anything concrete. Some members of the Labour Party made some comments that could potentially have been interpreted as being anti-semitic. Everyone went absolutely crazy, without anything in the way of evidence, and it caused a major political scandal. Labour themselves made the whole situation infinitely worse by not properly investigating the allegations, which made it look like they were trying to protect people. In reality I think it was just incompetence.

        It was the very definition of a storm in a teacup, essentially nothing had happened but the opposition parties reacted as if it was some major scandal for the sole purpose of political point scoring.

        Labour subsequently lost the 2019 elections and the suggestion was it was because of this scandal.

        So when Starmer became leader one of the things he said he was going to do was root out anti-Semitism within the party (no matter how much he had to dig for it), this was around 2020 but he had been campaigning about it since around 2018. Anyway when he became leader there was a big bust up where he got rid of anyone he thought was being anti-semitic (again there was a lot of doubt about whether or not they were being). Then in 2024 they won the election. So ever since then they’ve been very careful to not appear anti-semitic to the point at which they are refusing to even acknowledge Israel’s war crimes.

        This is all especially annoying since they would have won the 2024 general election no matter what because the Conservatives were polling so badly. So this big arguement about anti-Semitism was completely unnecessary. Had it not happened Labour would still be in power, but would be less inclined to shy away from criticism of Israel.

        TLDR

        Accusing Labour of been anti-semitic has been the default position of the opposition for a while because it works. Who cares about the truth anymore?

        • 0x0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          they’ve been very careful to not appear anti-semitic to the point at which they are refusing to even acknowledge Israel’s war crimes.

          And that’s how you completely conflate the meaning of a word.

        • skisnow@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          The bit you’ve skimmed over is that it happened under Corbyn, who was hugely popular with Labour members for being actually Left Wing, and hugely unpopular amongst the entire rest of the political and media establishments (including Labour MPs) for exactly the same reason. Pretty much everyone on all sides who’d never given a toss about antisemitism before were suddenly pearl-clutching over the tiniest statement made by a backbencher’s assistant’s brother’s gibbon because it was a handy way to bring Corbyn down without having to give any airtime to debating his (very popular) policies.

        • courval@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Thanks for clarifying, I’ve heard about the accusations before but never really understood what they were accused of… But I think the last couple of years of “anti-Semitism” left and right accusations aimed at individuals who are simply against the murder of innocent people help explain it. My guess is that some members of labour saw the Israeli regime for the terrorists they are ages ago and didn’t shut up about it… The Zionist lobby in the UK is obscene… Shame on these crooks!

    • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I think it’s a bit far to call them terrorists,

      Did you mean “a bit unfair”? Because I don’t see how anybody would be terrorized by this. It’s clearly illegal but using terrorism here is very problematic, especially since what the military does to people in the middle easy is actual terrorism but not called that.

      Afaik the “anti-Semitism in Labour” was basically a made up smear by the Labour Party themselves to prevent Jeremy Corbyn getting elected. Not sure about other instances though.

    • skisnow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah, they lost an election over an antisemitism row a few years ago and have chosen the worst possible moment in history to start overcompensating for it.

    • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      They are not being charged because they protested, they’re being charged for breaking in and damaging a lot of military equipment. I think it’s a bit far to call them terrorists, but you can sort of see the government’s point, if you squint.

      Out of curiosity, I looked up the US Federal definition of terrorism

      definition
      1. the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that-
        1. involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
        2. appear to be intended-
          1. to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
          2. to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
          3. to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
        3. occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States

      Due to the element danger to human life, their definition wouldn’t fit.

      However, the UK legal definition

      definition
      1. In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
        1. the action falls within subsection (2),
        2. the use or threat is designed to influence the government [or an international governmental organisation][1] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
        3. the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [, racial][2] or ideological cause.
      2. Action falls within this subsection if it—
        1. involves serious violence against a person,
        2. involves serious damage to property,
        3. endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
        4. creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
        5. is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
      3. The use or threat of action falling within subsection (2) which involves the use of firearms or explosives is terrorism whether or not subsection (1)(2) is satisfied.
      4. In this section—
        1. “action” includes action outside the United Kingdom,
        2. a reference to any person or to property is a reference to any person, or to property, wherever situated,
        3. a reference to the public includes a reference to the public of a country other than the United Kingdom, and
        4. “the government” means the government of the United Kingdom, of a Part of the United Kingdom or of a country other than the United Kingdom.
      5. In this Act a reference to action taken for the purposes of terrorism includes a reference to action taken for the benefit of a proscribed organisation.

      is wild: no danger to human life required, merely serious damage to property suffices!


      1. Words in s. 1(1)(2) inserted (13.4.2006) by Terrorism Act 2006 (c. 11), s. 34; S.I. 2006/1013, art. 2 ↩︎

      2. Words in s. 1(1)(3) inserted (16.2.2009) by Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 (c. 28), ss. 75(1)(2)(a), 100(5) (with s. 101(2)); S.I. 2009/58, art. 2(a) ↩︎

      • catty@lemmy.worldBanned
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—

        the action falls within subsection (2), the use or threat is designed to influence the government [or an international governmental organisation][1] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public

        Wow, so the very act of peaceful protest is now defined as ‘terrorism’ because the below can be very loosely interpreted in whatever way necessary:

        creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public

        • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public

          I don’t know: it’s possible. If legal definitions & case law (which I don’t know enough about) don’t settle their meaning, then they could mean anything. A lawyer could clarify.

    • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      They even forbid the playing of “Don’t cry for me Argentina” during the wer to protect their Malvinas colony.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        That would have been the Conservatives though. The Conservatives under Thatcher were in power during the Falklands war.

        • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Same as in the US, that doesn’t matter.
          They will always support their regime wars.
          R/D in the US or Labour/Cons in the UK.
          Warcriminal Blair is a good example.

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            The actions one political party are irrelevant to the actions of another political party. Especially over the course of such time.

            If you want to make the arguement that the labour party are warmongering then there’s much that you can do to make that arguement but to equate the current situation to the Falklands war is disingenuous at absolute best.

    • wheezy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      If there is ever justice for Palestine the trials will be short. These bastards are so proud of their support for genocide.

    • jimmy90@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      if they promise to only paint things orange on military bases i think that’s ok

      we’ll take their word for it

  • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    5 months ago

    The harder they push their pro-Israel agenda, the more anti-Israel everyone is going to get.

    You can’t bully us into supporting a genocidal regime.

    • BeBopALouie@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      My fucking brain is so fried.

      Both my parents were in World War II. They fought against fascism. I was brought up to feel for what happened to the Jews during that war. Now all I see is that they seem to be being worse than the actual Nazis.

      • novibe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        5 months ago

        Israel =/= the “Jews”.

        Israel’s founders were actually very prejudiced against Jews that survived the holocaust. And much more against the ones that didn’t actually…

        • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Louder for the people in the back!

          Zionists = religious nationalists / colonialists / fascists

          Anti-zionists = anti-all-of-the-above

          The Jewish ethnic/religious part is completely irrelevant. There are many thousands of non-jews who support Israel’s genocide, as evidenced by this batshit draconian illegitimate law. The UK/USA likely created Israel solely to destabilize the region and have an ally in the middle of the oil they needed. Within the next decade they then overthrew Irans democratically elected socialist leader because he wanted to expel British Petroleum and nationalise production (like Norway has been doing for decades).

          If you just hate jews you’re some flavor of fascist or religious nationalist, so no better than zionists or any of the criminals who created this mess.

        • BeBopALouie@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I guess I am ignorant in that respect. When I was taught back in the 60’s it was taught as the Jewish people and all dissidents, disabled and whoever else the nazi’s wanted out of the way.

          • DogWater@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I said what I did because in today’s world the labeling matters between Jewish people and zionists. Not because of anything that happened in WWII, but rather because you can condemn what the people in Israel are doing in Palestine and it has nothing to do with their faith.

            However, there are people who will call you anti semetic for doing that and it’s just not true.

      • Deceptichum@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, nah.

        The only people who win when you conflate Israel with all Jewish people are Zionists and Neo-Nazis.

      • John Richard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        What Israel is doing is very much Nazi like. But saying such will get you banned on Mastodon.social, and probably prosecuted in places like Germany.

      • 0x0@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I was brought up to feel for what happened to the Jews during that war.

        And neglected to mention that it wasn’t just jews but anyone the nazis didn’t like, such as gays, communists, other races, etc.

        • BeBopALouie@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          I did not intentionally not mention them. I was just talking about them because they were the specific topic of discussion. Of course there were others.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I have a feeling they can. If all discourse over social media is anti Palestine and no one can refute it, I give it 10 years max before it would just be a frothing hate for Palestinians with a significant amount of the population.

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        They are already trying to do this and failing miserably at it. Censorship itself is an admission of guilt and is something that people are really starting to understand. That’s basically the point of my original comment: the harder they try to stop dissent, the more guilty they look.

        Information can also be spread offline.

  • FlyingCircus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    They are doing this because Palestine Action has been incredibly effective. They have already forced the closure of two factories in England that produce arms for Israeli defense company Elbit and forced Barclays Bank to divest through sustained sabotage campaigns. No person has been hurt by their actions, yet these actions have cost the genocide supporters millions of pounds and caused months-long disruptions to the production of weapons used in ethnic clean songs around the globe (Elbit weapons are fueling not just the Palestine ethnic cleaning, but Kashmir and DRC, too).

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      5 months ago

      Wow protestors these days will stoop to the level of wisely putting pressure on major companies supporting genocide?!?

      First property damage and now this??

      clutches plastic pearls

        • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          In a “broken clock is right twice a day” type of thing, all the conspiracy theorists talking about how Jews secretly run the world have a bit of a point, although it’s specifically the Israeli govt/military and not Judaism as a whole. We, the most powerful military in human history, just hand them shit that goes bang for ethical (religious and lobbying) reasons and to actually hopefully bring about Armageddon. It’s disgusting

          • oo1@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I think Jewish people were effectively invited into that position across much of Europe, back when the Catholic church forbade usury but the people still wanted banks.

            Unfortunately for many Jewish people , some of their number became a major driving force for capitalism.

  • splonglo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Not only is the ruling wrong - it is the very thing it claims to be opposing. It is itself an act of terrorism, carried out with the intention of inspiring fear in the British public to further a political agenda.

    In every way, the British government is replicating the actions it accuses PA of - except that the scale of harm to British society and the terror inspired is magnitudes greater, and performed in service of the opposite political goal.

    This is a terror attack by the government against the British people.

    The British people’s opinion and will are the thing from which the goverment gains it’s only source of legitimacy - and they do not line up with the government on this issue.

    But evidently the government believes in a different model of legitimacy: they believe that legitimacy is derived from the mere fact that they hold power. In the mind of the government and it’s supporters, the difference between a terrorist organisation and a legitimate government is just power and only power. To them, right and wrong has absolutely nothing to do with it. They think that they are winning, and that they are going to get away with it. Nothing else matters.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      But evidently the government believes in a different model of legitimacy: they believe that legitimacy is derived from the mere fact that they hold power.

      *Macht macht Recht"

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m more shocked it hasn’t already happened to Extinction Rebellion, Insulate Britain or Just Stop Oil.

    But I guess blockading motorways and rocking up to art museums dressed like extras from a Wham music video and defacing paintings makes you less of a threat than wanting Netanyahu to stop his genocide of the Palestinian people.

    • laserm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Still, calling blocking motorways and defacing painting terrorism is a stretch.

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          And that’s pretty much what Palestine Action did

          Not quite.

          three protestors from the group “stormed, scaled and occupied” an APPH drone factory in Runcorn.[33] Activists daubed red paint on the exterior, dismantled drone and aircraft machinery and destroyed windows

          (…)

          In January 2024, Palestine Action vandalised an office of the logistics company Kuehne + Nagel in Milton Keynes by smashing windows and spraying the building with paint

          (…)

          In May 2024, Edinburgh Palestine Action activists targeted a Leonardo factory in Crewe Toll (…) a spokesperson for the group saying, "In the early hours of Tuesday 28th May [2024], a group opened the box of cables, cut the internet wires, sprayed expanding foam inside the box

          (…)

          October 2024, Palestine Action targeted a factory in Bromborough, Wirral Peninsula, a producer of F-35 fighter plane (…) The action consisted of breaking through the roof and spraying red paint into cleanrooms, with a manager for Teledyne allegedly claiming "damage to the clean rooms could halt production for up to 12 months

          They did proper sabotage as well.

          In June 2025, members of Palestine Action gained access to RAF Brize Norton on electric scooters and used “repurposed fire extinguishers” to spray red paint into the engines of two Royal Air Force Airbus A330 MRTT refuelling planes

          I think it’s also worth noting that this is the stupidest possible way of protesting against Israel and pro-Palestine. There are SO MANY weapons suppliers all over the place… But more importantly, Israel can do fine with domestic production when fighting Hamas/Hezbollah. They need external supplies for fighting Iran, sure, but this was all before that happened.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      They get too much money from it. The things you listed are visible and awful, But, money…

  • Lucky_777@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Looks like the UK is going down the American road here. It’s time for all those UK citizens that said, “Rise up now!” to Americans months ago…time to rise up! Give us a great example!

    Oh, you can’t because you have to work for a living? How about that…

    • mriswith@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      5 months ago

      There is also legislation that can be used to arrest most protestors. And you can face a multi-year prison sentence if you say something wrong on social media.

      The UK is actually further along the dystopian path than the USA in some ways, but as is tradition they are trying to pretend it’s not happening.

      • Mamdani_Da_Savior@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        During the Korean war a British unit was being overrun by the Chinese. The American general asked the British Colonel how things where and the Colonel said its a bit hairy. While the American general took this to mean they are ok. They got overrun and everyone in the unit was killed or captured.

        • Apepollo11@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          I love these kinds of stories, but I think that specific example is just a misunderstanding of idioms, rather than an example of pretending something isn’t happening, though.

          • mriswith@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            It is representative of how British people often avoid the truth or confrontations and instead use sarcasm, idioms, etc. that understate the situation.

            The English are also a worldwide example of people who go “Oh no, everything is fine.” when everything is wrong.

            There are even famous British comedies like Fawlty Towers, that have a lot of jokes about how they don’t like to be honest or confrontational.

    • JimVanDeventer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 months ago

      UK has always had that 1984/Brazil (the movie, not the not-movie) vibe; it wasn’t all just pulled out of Orwell’s magic butt.

  • khaleer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    That’s good reason to remind people, that law is written by particular people, mostly to protect those people interests.

    • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      So said Orwell many, many decades ago and people still vote for theae shitstains. There was some slight chance under Corbin but people want more Tory, so here we are.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Has he actually because I keep hearing conflicting reports. A Labour MP left and claimed that she was joining a new party with Corbin, however I don’t think Corbin himself has actually confirmed this, and I thought he was done with politics anyway.

          So this new party seemed to be carrying on the fine old tradition of the left being utterly useless at communications.

          • Tomato666@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            Well yes you are technically correct.

            Zarah has quit Labour and Corbyn has said they will create something new. At this moment they are intending to create something new.

            I wonder if any others in Labour or if any of the independants will join them. There should be a few and maybe they’ll have more than five members.

  • csverdad@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    The most widely celebrated circumstance in the world is being rid of the British government. It’s spawned many holidays.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      It is of course somewhat disingenuous to equate the empire to the modern British government. In much the same way that it makes no sense to say that Japan in its current form has any relation to feudal Japan.

      • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Only difference is that they now only have a fraction of their power.
        OTOH they 100% have the same horrible attitude.
        Like the declining US now doesn’t realise they aren’t top dog anymore, the Brits who have been surpassed by them for a century still delude themselves and think they can and should dictate what the world should do.
        Glad we had Brexit.
        Always causing trouble and wanting it their way.
        Embarrassing.

  • kreskin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    5 months ago

    Feeding, housing and guarding someone for 14 years has got to be ridiculously expensive. All for uttering a few words.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Just to be clear as much as this is an abhorrent thing for them to do, it won’t result in anything. The people who they have arrested have already been charged, so this changing the law doesn’t have any effect on that legal decision and pretty much no one else is associated with them.

      They’re a very small very vocal activist group. The general feeling is that they actually did go too far on this. They are not banning protests in general just this particular organisation, which in fairness, did break into a military base so I don’t know what they expect it to happen.

      So you’re probably safe from oppression, even if you were actually in the UK.

      • 0x0@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        The general feeling is that they actually did go too far on this.

        Vandalizing military equipment to protest against a genocide doesn’t strike me as “too far”.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          What does the UK military have to do with a private company sending weapons to Israel? All the protesters are asking for is the weapon companies not to be allowed to send weapons from Israel from UK soil, I’m sure they would just send them from the US but at least it’s a stance.

          The UK military isn’t doing anything in Israel so they are weird target

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          I suppose an arguement could be made that terrorists might want to break into a military base and might use this group as a vehicle through which to do that. It would be an absurd arguement but it wouldn’t be totally irrational.

          I don’t support this action by the UK government, but quite a few people in this thread seem to be of the opinion that the UK government is banning all protest which isn’t happening here. So I just wanted to set the record straight.

          • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Didn’t we functionally ban all protests under Borris? something about them not being allowed if they inconvenience anyone in any way real or imagined so really you can only have them if you do it alone in a dark closet very quietly, or get permission in which case its not a protest.

          • Gort@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            …quite a few people in this thread seem to be of the opinion that the UK government is banning all protest which isn’t happening here.

            Best to add a “yet” to the end of that sentence. This is just one more rung to the ladder.

  • Lady Butterfly she/her@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s important to remember that the headline refers to the group Palestine action, which has carried out vandalisation of historical pieces, occupations of property, destruction etc (see here). So it’s a group that fits the UK definition of an extremist group.

    Some political groups (or even branches of them) can be political cults trapping members with coercive control It’s not always idealistic well meaning people. The court that decreed them an unlawful group will have seen a lot of info we didn’t.

    I think we need to look deeper than the headline

    • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s important to remember that the headline refers to the group Palestine action

      Coming into this thread, thinking that you couldn’t legally support Palestine in the UK anymore, I feel like the headline was just a bit misleading.

        • Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s rather misleading, yeah, but also, “technically correct”?

          While we are clearly discussing an actual criminal group and not just people protesting for Palestine, the implications from a decision like that are a bit wider.

          Civil disobedience is a crucial tool for democracy, but it’s easy for that to be taken too far.

          And at this time that Russia is waging a shadow war in Europe, we probably should be little wary of any even paramilitary-esque groups, despite how important it is to protest the genocide in Gaza.

          Surely there’s still plenty of legal ways to do that?

            • Dasus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              No, I’m not saying that.

              It’s just sometimes easy to smudge proper protesters with criminal groups, and historically that has happened a fair bit.

              Like people can make a new organisation and try to step away from the criminal one, but also what’s to prevent the criminal element from joining them as well, and then the same justification can be used to ban that group and on and on and on.

              So honestly defining the point at which it could be argued to be suppression of political ideas is very hard to pinpoint, imo.

              • Lady Butterfly she/her@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I understand your concerns. The courts need a lot of evidence to do that though, and it’s a long process. So realistically it doesn’t happen unless it has to

                • Dasus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Yeah, I’m just a tad worried, that’s all. I’m not saying it’s a slippery slide.

                  Just you know. It’s not been a great direction the world’s been going so…

    • Smoogs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      By that very definition the US insurrectionists should be reintroduced to jail

    • IcyToes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Dangerous and many voted against it. We already had politicians dead across both sides of the pond. Shouldn’t be encouraging this BS.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah but that’s been the opinion of the British public since the 1960s. Calling every British politician a useless skidmark (preferably to their face) is as close as we get to patriotism.