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).

I reluctantly agree, I think ‘terrorism’ is a bit too strong for Palestine Action. That’s just a personal opinion. I think they’re getting close though, and as you said, all crime should be dealt with swiftly and in the same manner as the post rioting offences. Justice has to be ‘seen to be done’.

Are you serious?? If breaking into an RAF base and deliberately vandalising planes isn’t a terrorism offence then I don’t know what is.

Wow.

how long did that take to bring anti semitism into it.

The sledgehammers we’re not used against people
Maybe get your facts right before you follow any old diatribe that fits your desire to slag off anyone and everyone that doesn’t agree with you.

The article is out of date and does not reflect the full truth of the case.

Moving on

This isn't about Gaza, people can and do protest about Gaza all they like. It is perfectly legal to protest what is going on in Gaza.

My thread is about people who are not protesting what is going on in Gaza but who have decided to protest supporting this group.

This group have members who are violent and who have used violence against members of the public and police officers in the course of acting for this group.

Is that something that you would be willing to risk arrest to support?

What's an offensive weapon?

I don't believe that anyone should be arrested for holding placards up as long as they're not calling for violence.

Read the UN article linked up thread.
‘The UN does not agree with Labours use of the word for Palestine Action.

I agree.
The definition isn’t difficult to understand and PA do not fall within that

Argue the toss with the UN.
I think they’re probably far more educated on the facts
Clearly quite a few I see that do think it’s a correct use of the very clear definition. They’re very wrong and blinded by a group that basically don’t like Israeli actions in Gaza. That’s tough really. They aren’t terrorists. That’s just ridiculous and the UN agree.

You think it is fine to hold up placards supporting Hitler or Al-Qaeda?

But hang on, the UN statement that some keen to link to very early on says:

According to international standards, acts of protest that damage property, but are not intended to kill or injure people, should not be treated as terrorism.”

Given GBH is on the charge sheet it looks like a case could be made that there was an intent to injure.

Personally as far as Brize goes it might have been better to invoke the Aviation Security Act where there's the potential for locking someone up for life if they are found guilty of deliberately damaging aircraft but I guess the CPS chickened out of going that far.

@noblegiraffe I made it clear that I do not support criminal activities in the pursuit of any aim. I also do not support the governments decision to categorise criminal activities as terrorism. It diminishes what terrorism is. But I also recognise that there is absolutely no way that this thread will do anything except serve as an echo chamber. Nobody wants to consider the dangers of simply slapping a label of terrorism on people because we disagree with them or the way they act.

How about you share with us in what way you consider the murder of civilians including children as something that you can support?

I don’t really understand to be honest. Regardless of whether proscribing this group was the wrong or right thing to do, why do these people just not form a different group that specifically disavows the actions that got the first group proscribed and then protest against the Israeli government under that banner? Is there something preventing them?

It would have to be proved that they went there deliberately to attack people.
They went their to trash the equipment because that is their modus operandi.

And what do you think about Hamas? Do you see them as a terrorist organisation?

They were/are linked to violence though. You can't seriously equate the actions of PA with adolf hitler?

In the same way you want people to believe you’re capable of supporting Gaza without agreeing with terrorist or violent methods, I think you should afford other people the same nuance and not call OP’s disdain of Palestine Action ‘support of child killing’.

I feel a lot are protesting against Labour's heavy handed use of the word Terrorist .
‘It’s an attempt by Labour to shut down demonstrations against Israel

It’s an attack on our right to demonstrate and free speech.
It’s quite Trumpish

How about you share with us in what way you consider the murder of civilians including children as something that you can support?

Don't be ridiculous.

Nobody wants to consider the dangers of simply slapping a label of terrorism on people because we disagree with them or the way they act.

This isn't about whether Palestine Action should be considered terrorists or not. The fact is that they have been proscribed therefore it is illegal to support them, and yet people are deliberately doing that, even though Palestine Action members are currently up in court for causing grievous bodily harm.

I wouldn't personally go out to be arrested in support of a group who are violent, so I am wondering if the people that have done this are aware of the violence.

Palestine Action are linked to violence? Literally the topic of this thread.

Yes, they specifically want to support a group that has been proscribed. Because they don't like that it's been proscribed. That's what is stopping them.

@MumOfManyAliases

OP told pro Palestinian supporters on here this isn’t a discussion about Gaza.

So
This has nothing to do with Hamas
This thread us about Palestine Action

Can anyone think of a time the public in an Islamic country - any Islamic country - have come out in force in this way to protest the treatment of people in other countries?

Genuinely asking.

I had this debate with someone earlier.

It’s not a secret that PA has been proscribed. You can still oppose the actions in Gaza without naming PA.

IMHO if you set out to actively support PA then the consequences are yours to deal with - regardless of age, gender or anything else. I also think for all the people saying “haven’t the police got better things to be doing”…yes, they likely have, so people deliberately breaking the law by supporting PA are consciously contributing to keeping them away from other important business!

If it makes any odds, I'm very pro Palestine.

I thought from what you’d said the weapons were used specifically for attacking police and people. Having read the article, it seems the weapons were used to break in to the building and then when apprehended, people were hurt with the weapons.

Violence against planes and a confused story about a sledgehammer attack which wasn't against a person?

Not necessarily.
The or any weapons haven’t been mentioned in terms of the assault. Just that people were hurt. The charge sheets don’t evidence weapons