Do the people being arrested for Palestine Action not know about the sledgehammer attack?

[noblegiraffe]

With 500-odd people having been arrested for expressing support for proscribed terrorist organisation Palestine Action, I'm just baffled as to why they are willing to get a criminal record which could bar them from travel to the USA and work in education for an organisation whose members attacked police officers with a sledgehammer.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/disturbing-sledgehammer-attack-police-during-9463071

Regardless of whether this group should be proscribed as a terrorist organisation, surely no one should look at that and think 'yeah, that's a group I think should be allowed to continue to do its thing, attack a few more police officers with sledgehammers, that's the hill I'm willing to die on.'

Wouldn't you think 'I'm not sure if they should be proscribed as terrorists, but given the sledgehammer attack, I'm not going to turn up with banners in support and be arrested for them, I'll just get on with protesting the genocide instead because that's a better cause'.

So do they not know about the violence? Or do they not care and are willing to support violent organisations?

(note this is not a thread for debating Gaza, I want to talk about British people who are absolutely legally allowed to protest genocide but aren't allowed to support proscribed terrorist organisations - which is also not allowed on MN).

They have an extensive training manual. I assume they cover it in their courses too.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/society/article/palestine-action-manual-protests-hlll7vjp9
(Archived version here:)
https://archive.is/OiFJZ

"It suggests using fire extinguishers refilled with blood-red paint; smashing windows and equipment with sledgehammers; blocking sewage pipes with concrete; and breaking into the building.
“If you’re feeling up for it, and know the site back to front, then breaking into your target and damaging the contents inside is obviously a very effective tactic,” it states."

What evidence do you have that they have no concern
Have there been interviews ?
Is it in a manifesto ?

ie. Reliable sources

'Diplomacy' is not shaking the hands of a terrorist who had a 10 million dollar bounty on his head by the United States. 'Diplomacy' is not handing over £100 million of taxpayer's money to a (confirmed) former leader of Alqaeda. The UK is now also considering talking Alqaeda affiliate terrorist group - HTS off the proscribed terrorist organisation list. My oh my. Let's pick and choose who we call terrorists... It's simply all a game of politics. We all know that.

And stopping the boats? Maybe ask the native Americans and Australians how they managed when the UK was sending boatloads of natives to their countries to pillage their land.

You only need to look as far as Northern Ireland.

Their co-founder gave a speech

In Manchester on 8 October, Mr Barnard said in his speech: "When we hear the resistance, the Al-Aqsa flood, we must turn that flood into a tsunami of the whole world"

The "Al-Aqsa flood" is Hamas's name for the massacre of over 1000 Israelis and the taking of 250 Israeli hostages.

He doesn't sound particularly concerned about that.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67100274

I think that throwing smoke bombs and pyrotechnics into an area where people have been evacuated would seem to be evidence that they have no concern.

That information was contained in the Gov.uk link posted by a pp and was stated as one of the reasons for proscribing them.

I can’t find anything
If its imbedded in a Telegraph article if so its behind a paywall

Did you read the piece about Israel pushing the U.K. to stop PA after a U.K. supplier to Israel pulled out after they were targeted.

Throwing smoke bombs, spray painting a plane and criminal damage to various buildings and equipment is not the definition of terrorism. It took more than that to get the U.K. to proscribe them.

Yeah, it would have been in the Native Americans best interest to kill every European on sight, and not let them get a toe hold.

Are you arguing by analogy that this is what the British should do to the irregular migrants coming by boat? Seems a little extreme to me.

Well, that leaves no doubt at all about what Palestine Action is really about, however it currently chooses to present itself for PR purposes.

Raised Catholic, Barnard was once part of a Christian anarchist group called the Catholic Worker, which seeks to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable”. He has broken into American Air Force bases in Germany nine times, alongside local monks, Prospect has reported.

Today, Mr Barnard identifies as Muslim. As well as co-founding Palestine Action, he’s also a member of Extinction Rebellion. (surprise!)

He’s currently facing three charges for two speeches he gave on October 8 and October 11 2023, for which he is asking for donations to help cover legal costs.

He wrote on Crowd Justice: “I've been accused of one count of inviting support for a proscribed organisation, namely Hamas, under section 12(1A) of the Terrorism Act and two counts of encouraging 'criminal damage' against Israeli weapons factories under s44 of the Serious Crime Act.”

Boo hoo Mr Barnard, maybe stop promoting Hamas immediately after the most obscene terrorist attack of modern history, and you might have a quieter life and stop needing to ask people to send you money.

The co-founder Hudda Ammori's "Palestinian great-grandfather was killed by British soldiers in the 1936 uprising against the British." So, understandably, a personal axe to grind there. However, the English made my Welsh ancestors very unwelcome in their own land and yet my parents settled quite happily in England without feeling the need to seek vengeance.

Some people end up in jail who really just need therapy. Sad fact of life.

www.standard.co.uk/news/palestine-action-uk-challenge-court-b1234401.html

LOL are you wilfully choosing to be blind about PA?

Smoke bombs and criminal damage are ABSOLUTELY within the definition of terrorism - the Terrorism Act 2000 defines it as:

• serious violence against a person;
• serious damage to property;
• endangering a person's life (other than that of the person committing the action);
• creating a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public; and
• action designed to seriously interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.

PA are so totally engaged in terrorism acts that I find the blind refusal to recognise this by some posters beyond disingenuous. I am as sympathetic towards demonstrating against the escalating violence and increasingly inhumane actions of the Israeli government as the next person and happily sign petitions and speak to my local MP about my concerns. What I do NOT do, however, is support terrorism - that of Hamas, PA or any other organisation that commits wilful acts of criminal damage and puts people’s lives at risk as a consequence of those acts or in the process of carrying them out. You can support Palestinian people without supporting terrorism, which those arrested at this march were NOT doing. They were there with the sole intention of unveiling their ‘I support PA’ placards.

PA are in every sense of the legal definition a terrorism group.

@Beachtastic he is crowdfunding for his defence of the charge of supporting Hamas when he said 'When we hear the resistance, the Al-Aqsa flood, we must turn that flood into a tsunami of the whole world'? And of inviting criminal damage when he definitely invites criminal damage?

Who the hell is going to donate for the defence against those charges? I mean, it's hardly a complex case, is it?

Incidentally, do you remember the Extinction Rebellion action a few years back where they stopped a Docklands Light Railway train by standing on top of it and glueing themselves to it and everyone was like 'FFS, aren't climate activists always telling us to take public transport, why are they attacking public transport?' Guess who was on top of that train....

Possibly the equivalent people of those who donate to Yaxley-Lennon's never ending (self-inflicted) legal battles.

Yes, they are bizarre too. I'm wondering if the crowdfunding for his defence where he then pleaded guilty and went on a luxury holiday after he got out of prison will put them off next time.

I don't think it would for a large percentage of them. He seems to have the kind of following like Trump, where his actions have no impact on his popularity.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/three-groups-to-be-proscribed

This is the link I was talking about , not the Telegraph one. The point I was making was that they were, at the very least, reckless as to whether they injured or killed any of the employees at the company when they were attacking it.

If you had read my post properly you would have seen that I said that I don't know enough about about how proscription works to say whether the government were correct in proscribing PA.

The fact that they did not care whether people were injured was obviously one of the reasons for proscription. I did not say it was the only one.

The fact that they did not care whether people were injured was obviously one of the reasons for proscription. I did not say it was the only one.

The timing of the decision to proscribe PA is significant. It came hot on the heels of events atBrize..

Once PA attacked/vandalised/sabotaged (delete as appropriate) the RAF aircraft it allowed HMG to introduce (IMO quite rightly) risk to national security into the argument.

I don't know what the courts will decide on this one, but a group that has attacked our national security and (per the Telegraph article) is planning further attacks on our military bases shouldn't be allowed?

Perhaps those crowdfunding to try to get Barnard off his 'supporting Hamas' charges could also crowdfund the millions that they've caused in damages so that it doesn't get charged to the taxpayer?

😂 Love the way you say what the Native Americans should have done, and then call me the extremist!
If the UK didn't initiate/involve itself in so many conflicts offshore, there likely wouldn't be so many 'irregular immigrants' in the first place. Plus, the vast amounts of money invested in war could be put to better use, making the UK a nicer place to live in.

"History doesn't repeat itself but it often rhymes"

It wasn't an attack on police though. PA were infiltrating an Elbit facility with the intention of damaging their ability to produce lethal munitions (or equipment which would aid and abet the use of same) with - amongst other tools - sledgehammer. The police arrived to arrest them for criminal damage (rightly) and in the ensuing chaos two officers were injured with sledgehammers. We don't know the exact details of the incident (for example whether any PA activists were attacked first, or if they were acting in self-defence) but on the face of it that's bad, and the people who did it should face the appropriate consequences. However, calling it a "sledgehammer attack" makes it sound like they broke into a police station with express purpose of smashing in a copper's head, and it was nothing like that.

Only if they said "they broke into a police station with express purpose of smashing in a copper's head with sledhehammers'. Noone said that. They knew there would be people, security guards and/or police. When the police arrived did they put the sledgehammers down and put their hands up?

You sound very sympathetic to an organisation whose co-founder spoke in praise of Hamas on 8 October 2023. Not sure if that date rings any bells for you, but curious to know what you think of him doing that at that particular moment in time?

https://www.preventwatch.org/glorify-hamas-and-you-break-law-says-uk-terror-watchdog/

Thanks for resurrecting this thread and reminding me what a horrible lot they are.

Putting a police officer in hospital isn't something I'd be defending anyone over, but you do you.

I'm one of the 857 people arrested on suspicion of a terrorism offence in Parliament Square on Saturday for holding a placard which said 'I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.' I am very, very concerned about the story that a female police officer was hurt with a sledgehammer. One person who took part in that Elbit action has been charged with GBH and I'll be following his trial closely. I suspect that 99% of the others holding the placards would be horrified if the story turns out to be true, but I don't know any of them. We really are a bunch of ordinary, retired people, as shown in the papers. Very few younger people can join us because an arrest for a terrorism offence can mean no job, no foreign travel, no university place, no fostering of children....the list goes on and on.

It's easy to find out the name of the person charged with GBH, it's in several papers and is very easy to Google. I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that publishing it anywhere, including on Mumsnet, would be contempt of court, unless you say no more than what the charge is. I'm surprised that government ministers (Yvette Cooper and John Healey) keep telling the world that 'members of PA have attacked police with sledgehammers'. As there's only one member charged with any sort of assault, it would be obvious to jury members who it is. And two cabinet ministers have already said the person is guilty! It's in numerous newspapers! How can the trial be fair?

As for whether the story is true, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but an awful lot of lies are told by police! Ask any magistrate in a big city. They're always saying "I don't find that convincing" after an officer has given evidence. This is a polite way of saying "the officer made it up". Journalists and solicitors also know this. I saw it at first hand when I volunteered to help people in my community who were being victimised by police. The biggest lies are told by the senior officers.

Journalists also get stories wrong. They make an untold number of mistakes and sometimes they just make things up. (I also have first hand experience of this.)

There have been over 500 actions by Palestine Action. Masses of arrests for property damage but only one assault charge in all that time. Maybe this person is one bad apple? If so, he or she does not invalidate the vital work that PA does. If this person really is a violent thug I would expect PA to banish them. If they didn't I would withdraw my support. Maybe we'll never know, because the two ministers above seem to be doing their damnedest to get the case thrown out!

You can support your cause without supporting an organisation which is violent. Don't you think police resources would be better directed elsewhere than managing people who choose to get arrested?