No more Protest

Love it when people tell me what i think.....

Especially when i ve said repeatedly i do not hold to their cause.

I just don't believe people who have not taken part in terrorist activities, like cyber attacks on the NHS, should be sent to jail for longer periods of time than say someone who stuck a glass in someones face or killed someone whilst driving pissed.

Prison should be used sparingly & as a last resort, normally to be reserved for violent people.

However, it appears that many people believe prison should be used for people they don't agree with.......

Thinking about it, a law that made rich hippy donors to these causes liable for paying compensation might be a winner. 👍

On top of the protesters’ fully deserved prison sentences of course.

I don’t really understand why people are so resistant to reading or listening to the sentencing remarks and just witter on about fines.

In any event, how are they going to pay millions of pounds in fines, to “cover the cost” ?

Because you said “Comparing JSO to a terrorist organisation is just crazy.”

So I pointed out that blocking a massive and critical infrastructure part of the transport network is self-evidently as bad as a cyber attack.

You’re not really arguing that five years for mass disruption is excessive; you’re arguing that you sympathise with their cause.

Cyber terrorism is terrorism, it should be punished as such.

I posted the definitions of terrorism earlier, Cyber is clearly included, nothing JSO have done is classed as terrorism, but if they launch cyber attacks on the NHS etc, then clearly they ve moved from protest to terrorism.

Not really sure why you ve posted this question to me.

I know. Just expressing my opinion. It's a discussion thread.

Whether you agree or not is irrelevant. All opinions are not equal. Again, see Sentencing Remarks for full context instead of media reports. 🤦‍♂️

Well. I disagree.

Then your punishment would have been inappropriate for the crime of conspiracy as well as their calculated attempts to disrupt the proceedings.

And the fact they were on bail plus expressed an intent to do it again.

Custodial sentence was only option for the judge. See the sentencing remarks above. 🤦‍♂️

I wish I had been. I think fines would be better than custodial, however, if you agree with a prison sentence we'll just need to disagree.

Thank God you're not the judge....

Obviously fines (for the criminals themselves) would be ridiculous for causing deaths, scheming to cause more chaos and harm, and having a long history of criminal activity.

Prison is perfect as are the sentences.

I agree.

The Judge stated the five JSO convicts "embarked on a calculated campaign to disrupt the proceedings as far as you possibly could".

The five demonstrated complete contempt for the rule of law when planning their fanatical extremism, when carrying it out, when arrested and even when they were put on trial for it.

I must say I'm absolutely delighted to see the five have been RIGHTLY convicted of the crimes they stood accused of.

Ironically, it was the five JSO convicts who provided the evidence for their own conviction!

Now...that's what I call justice.

Already, I can predict the response to my post from some quarters.....🙈

Do you think a terrorist organisation that launched a cyber attack on, say, the banking system or the NHS and caused mayhem should be given a few months of community service, because, you know, it’s not violent is it?

One more.

Some selections from the Judge's sentencing remarks.

The case was far more serious than those attempting to defend JSO here seem to be asserting.

JSO absolutely convicted themselves via their own Zoom call evidence! 🙈

They killed people and were scheming horrific chaos that would almost certainly have killed and harmed more. Wonderful that the judge, for once, got it exactly right.

Domestic terrorists will reconsider harming the public after his widely praised sentence.

And yep no matter the cause I'd be delighted by this outcome.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/just-stop-oil-waterloo-bridge-ambulance-b2443700.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1686269/Just-Stop-Oil-Dartford-Bridge-M20-Lisa-Webber-BMW-Mark-Heap-CPR-ont

"mmmm which i why i used "perhaps and could" so no, i have to disagree, you ve just chosen to interpret it this way."

On the contrary, you attempted to make a clear link between JSO and Unions. And failed in the process.

"Laws can of course be changed, like i said, had the Tories won, strike action by Doc's/Nurses could then become unlawful (subject to min services levels) and they could then find themselves branded "extremists" and sentenced according to the law."

Laws that don't evolve to deal with emergent threats which are novel is a bad idea. That laws can be evolved, amended or altered is not an argument in favour of keeping laws in a straitjacket permanently.

Society doesn't stand still and neither does various threats to the society itself.

"In the case of JSO, had they done the exact same protest a few years ago, they would not have been sentenced to 4/5 years."

I suggest you read the judge's own ruling on this instead. It provides clarity on the legal reasons.

"Just because the law says so, doesn't automatically make that law just or correct, history is littered with examples."

This is simply Circular Reasoning. In other words, you've put the cart before the horse. Do yourself a favour and read the actual ruling itself.

Including the bit where previous criminal record by the accused was taken into account which results in....longer sentences imposed.

mmmm which i why i used "perhaps and could" so no, i have to disagree, you ve just chosen to interpret it this way.

Laws can of course be changed, like i said, had the Tories won, strike action by Doc's/Nurses could then become unlawful (subject to min services levels) and they could then find themselves branded "extremists" and sentenced according to the law.

In the case of JSO, had they done the exact same protest a few years ago, they would not have been sentenced to 4/5 years.

Just because the law says so, doesn't automatically make that law just or correct, history is littered with examples.

People are very keen to brand an organisation or indeed a Union "extremist" if they don't agree with them.

Alexandra barely a day went by without someone calling the Tories ‘fascist’. Those who’d lived under Hitler or Mussolini might disagree.

Yes, you did make the false equivalence between JSO and legitimate worker's unions. See 👇:

"...could also apply to some union organised strike action..."

Your reference to the NHS was after this and clearly separate.

But unions comply with the law. JSO has been shown to plan to NOT comply with the law plus previous criminal record added to the length of their respective sentences.

An Extremist is not quite the same as a Terrorist which is why I made the crucial distinction.

I can see why the layperson would consider JSO a terrorist organisation, but that's usually because MOST people don't think about terrorism in any real detail. I would say its important to understand why they make that comparison as opposed to instantly dismissing them.

Listening to and explaining the difference is more likely to result in people thinking a bit more about the issue.

My view is that JSO is an Extremist organisation rather than a Terrorist one. Largely due to having actual experience of a terrorist organisation on a daily basis.

I think there are exemptions for trade union type activity in the public order legislation.

I forgot to add earlier that they were also in breach of High Court injunctions relating to being on the M25 .

No i didn't make that equivalence, i said that "perhaps" points 3 and 4 could apply to JSO but also NHS strike action too...... which has undoubtedly led to serious disruption to the public, inc endangering their health through missed appointments etc.

People are very keen to brand an organisation or indeed a Union "extremist" if they don't agree with them.

There have been many threads on here calling for all forms of strike action (in the NHS) to be banned, if Sunak had won the GE, it would have happened too.

Comparing JSO to a terrorist organisation is just crazy.

Difference between Unions and JSO is that Union leaders such as USDAW et al comply with the law in various ways. Their action is largely directed against the employer whereas JSOs is more indiscriminate, i.e. members of the public are often negatively impacted.

As the judge made plain in his ruling, the JSO activists convicted didn't plan to comply with the law.

In short, you're drawing a false equivalence between workers Unions such as USDAW et al and JSO.

For me, JSO is more of an extremist organisation which UK law isn't really geared up for dealing with in a major way. But it is catching up with the problem of extremism in various guises.