Oi, you got a loicense for that pro-Palestinian sentiment?
The UK’s government is barbaric.
When Keir took over Labour and expelled thousands of decent left members for vague reasons it was clear of the authoritarian nature of him. At the time, I asked what do you think he’ll do if in charge of the state apparatus.
This is just the start.
This is absurd.
Yes Palestine Action broke the law by damaging insanely expensive property. And like any protest that dose this. The right or wrong of the cause has no effect on the legal requirements of the actions.
CND, Greenpeace and many many other protest organisations have also commited expensive crimes over the decades.
When a government starts deciding what citizens can or cannot support rather the how. It is no different to banning book or speech.
Does it count if you say something positive about Bobbie Vylan or Kneecap?
Just curious…
I support Palestine Action 🇵🇸
Now say it again now
You can’t say that this is a Christian server, where we support mass murder, like the good people that we are.
It’s fine, it only became shocking horrible proscribed terrorism speech at exactly midnight on the 5th July.
Since this commenter posted that sentiment on Friday, July 4th, 2025 at 10:05:07 PM GMT+01:00 He/She remains an upstanding, law abiding citizen
1 hour and 55 minutes later though…
Wow, and I thought the US was bad.
We just really really like you.
I don’t disagree that it wasn’t a reasonable protest and those responsible should be prosecuted for the criminal damage etc… but to list them as a terrorist group because of one non-terrorising action is a tad ridiculous, counter-intuitive, and the optics for the government are terrible.
don’t disagree that it wasn’t a reasonable
You broke my brain with that one
Fair enough, I wouldn’t disagree that it wasn’t the worstn’t way to word it.
Hahaha I got what you were saying but I had to read the first part like 5 times. All good though 👍
Double negative is positive, but a triple negative is back to negative. 😵💫
No! I said act shone not action.
I support palestine act shone!
Madness. This is madness. We have no right to criticise Russia or China after this
Madness? This is Starmer!
It’s Blair actually. His gvmt put through the changes to the Terrorism act in (I think) 2001 that has allowed this sort of thing to happen.
One of the ironies of this whole situation is that Yvette Cooper has expressed admiration for the Suffragette movement numerous times, including in the Commons. A movement that self-described as terrorists
Yeah, but that doesn’t rhyme with Sparta.
Sorry but of course they got banned. If they didn’t then the government would be sending the message that military sites are fair game and suddenly undermining the UK’s military preparedness would be a legitimate form of protest. If this had happened in the US they’d probably be facing the death penalty for treason.
They already sent that message. The moment anyone gets on one of those sites an alert should have gone off, and within minutes, they should have been apprehended. This is our air defense! Russian’s regularly fly past our air space even before Ukraine war and we have to scramble jets immediately. If they take these out, we’re sitting ducks.
John Healey, the defense secretary called for an immediate review of all sites because he knew it was shit and unacceptable.
Do you think if the Russians broke in, it would be red paint? This is a sideshow distraction.
i think we should arrest everyone who takes direct protest action against military targets, kier starmer.
Seems a bit much to label them as terrorist but they’ve done a lot of vandalism on various companies. Seems their MO is to find a target rationalize how it’s somehow tangentially associated with Israel and then break some shit.
They crossed a line when they did this to a military base and vandalized some RAF planes. They had some weirdo rationalization for this, but forgot to rationalize how this kind of thing will help anyone in Gaza. They seem to be just breaking things to get attention for themselves.
They crossed a line when they did this to a military base…
They didn’t cross the line into terrorism, though. Yes, they are criminals, no, they are not terrorists. It’s an incredibly important distinction. By definition, they are not terrorists:
criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages…
-definition of terrorism, UN resolution 1566
The UK parliament is sovereign, not the UN. So how the UN defines things isn’t relevant.
Also the law is meant to prevent terrorism. While I don’t agree with the designation in this case, I can understand the concern around how this group is escalating their attacks. There’s this “globalize the intifada” stochastic terrorism going around and the Iranian regime (the ultimate source of most of this shit) just got it’s ass handed to them and may be looking to do something to show their people they’re still “strong”.
Since the UK signed the UN charter in 1945, it might behoove us to conform to their definitions unless, of course the UK parliament has agreed on a different definition for terrorism?
You don’t see the connection with the air force? The military? Are you dense? Tell me you at least understand why they did Elbit and Thales…
The RAF isn’t part of the IDF last I checked.
Doing these kinds of stunts based on weird tangential connections does not gain any support for a cause. In fact it just turns people against it. This kind of thing is done purely to improve these people’s standing within the cause, but doesn’t further the cause itself. It’s just narcissistic attention seeking behaviour.
Why are you still allowed to talk? You’re a genocide apologist
So you think that some speech should be banned?
Ironic statement given the post. Speech has been banned, all that’s left to do is quibble about what speech.
Should speech supporting genocide be banned, or should speech protesting genocide be banned?
Maybe neither should be banned? Also I’m not “supporting genocide”, I just look at the casualty numbers and they’re consistent with a war, not a genocide. The word “genocide” has been weaponized and that’s rationalizing the use of violence which doesn’t help anyone.
These “Palestine Action” idiots are not helping Palestinians in any way. They’re narcissists doing vandalism to increase their standing within a internet small bubble. That’s all they’re doing.
You’re reading words I’ve written, that’s speech but apparently some people around here think that should be banned. Do you think words should be banned and vandalism by narcissists should be legal?
It was just interesting, that in a post about people’s speech being banned with legal consequences (14 years in prison) your first comment wasn’t to protest that. But in a comment threatening speech with social consequences (a ban from a social media site) you were right in on protesting that.
Once again, violence is already happening. All we can do now is quibble about who that violence is directed at.
Would you prefer violence against Palestinian civilians, or some property?
Summary:
Speech is already being banned. Do you think supporting/ denying the genocide should be banned? Or acknowledging/protesting the genocide should be banned?
Violence is already happening. Do you support the violence against Palestinian civilians. Or the violence against some planes.
To answer your question, given the choice between a world with more vandalism or a world with more genocide: I’d take the world with more vandalism.
I mean that’s what happens when your organisation organises a break-in of an RAF site and causes millions of pounds of damage to military aircraft.
There are reasonable ways to protest, and that wasn’t one of them.
Support one of the many other unaffected groups that support Palestine without doing absurd things like this.
Bootlicker
Of course I support peaceful protest, but not when it inconveniences the public somewhat, or if they trespass anywhere, or if they damage government property. And you can’t march in the streets, either
The cognitive dissonance is astounding. How’s that boot taste?
Millions of pounds? Oh those poor pounds, they must be terrified! Wait, what? Money doesn’t have feelings and nor do fighter jets? Therefore no terror was caused, and the proscribing of this group as terrorists is therefore absurd? No, no. tHeSe DeFeNsE cOrPoRaTiOnS hAvE a RiGhT tO dEfEnD hErSeLf.
That’s not what this is about. Everyone agrees that damage to military assets is a criminal action, no matter how you justify it. The problem I and others have is that the actions don’t meet any sort of sensible criteria for what is “terrorism”. Most people would say terrorism must involve mass harm to people, not necessarily property. Lots of other organisations over the years should have been proscribed if “terrorism” means property damage. Anyone involved in the race riots, Just Stop Oil, hell, even Banksy, would all qualify if that was the case. It opens the door for the UK government to proscribe any organisation it doesn’t like, which is especially concerning at a time when the next government is likely to be even more authoritarian and use this event as precedent to do the same but more.
Depends on your goals and what you are willing to risk to achieve them. Some people throw paint on priceless art, some people light themselves on fire, some people yell at people on the internet. Any protest is a cost-risk evaluation.
Didn’t they damage weapons for Ukraine, not Israel?
That was in Belgium I think.
