Wow, and I thought the US was bad.
We just really really like you.
I support Palestine Action 🇵🇸
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…
Now say it again now
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.
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.
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. 😵💫
What is a “reasonable” protest against murdering tens of thousands of people?
The UK’s government is barbaric.
It’s lost. Keeps passing ridiculous laws that only effect 0.1% of people just to look like it’s doing something. On many occasions people charged for breaking these laws get to court, and the laws are then overturned by judges because they contradict another law.
I expect this is what will happen here, eventually, but it might take 7 years to happen
Oi, you got a loicense for that pro-Palestinian sentiment?
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.
So, uh…does the UK government understand what happens when the punishment for speech is the same as the punishment for violence?
I only know the group Yvette Cooper
Does it count if you say something positive about Bobbie Vylan or Kneecap?
Just curious…
No! I said act shone not action.
I support palestine act shone!
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.
Nonsense. “This kind of thing” won women the vote and got us a weekend.
Those movements succeeded because they were lead by people that has clear goals and were able to make plans. They weren’t random people just doing random acts of vandalism to get monetization from tech bro billionaires.
Palestine Action has clear goals though.
Yeah their goal is to get attention for themselves (and probably social media monetization and donations from suckers) by acting like vandalism will have any real effect on anything.
Like what else could their actions ever possibly accomplish?
Well instead of guessing incorrectly, you could do a very small amount of research and find out!
As mentioned, direct action historically has produced results via political pressure.
Removed by mod
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 want the war to end. The only way the war ends is if Hamas releasing the hostages. If your protests were denouncing Hamas and calling upon them to release the hostages, then I might believe you care about Palestinians.
But you don’t really care about them. You’re just using Palestinian civilians the same way Hamas does: sacrificing them to justify the existence of a violent group.
There is a significant movement of Gazans protesting against Hamas rule. You admire these Palestine Action idiots, I admire Palestinians protesting against the oppressive Hamas government… in the middle of a war. Palestinians in Gaza struggle with forming and kind of opposition to Hamas because Hamas will torture people to death for speaking out against them.
I look at the photo in article and I see a bunch of white kids cosplaying as Palestinians at a protest in a western country. Cultural appropriation of the suffering of people in a place they’ve never been to. Suffering they have no understanding of. You’ve probably never even heard of Palestinians being tortured by Hamas for speaking out or the Hamas attack on food distribution that happened just yesterday because you’re in an internet bubble that bans anything that doesn’t conform to a narrative.
I respect actual Palestinians living in Gaza that protest against authoritarians. You respect some white kids living in an internet bubble that cosplay as Palestinians and vandalize shit. But go on believing you have some internet fabricated moral high ground just because you can spell the word “genocide”.
Perhaps you responded to the wrong person. Here’s what my comment stated and asked:
Speech is being banned. Would you prefer speech supporting/denying genocide be banned? Or, speech protesting genocide be banned?
Violence is already happening. Would you prefer violence be used to support genocide? Or, violence be used against planes in protest of genocide?
Personally, I would prefer vandalism over genocide. Not a particularly tricky moral dilemma for me, weird question to have asked.
Noteably, nothing about Hamas. You saw that right? Tilt at some other windmills.
Removed by mod
So you agree with censorship. You just disagree on which people should be censored.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Banned from humanity.
What do you mean by this? Is that a death threat?
Removed by mod
