Codifying your genocide support into law. Nice.
If there is ever justice for Palestine the trials will be short. These bastards are so proud of their support for genocide.
if they promise to only paint things orange on military bases i think that’s ok
we’ll take their word for it
Not only is the ruling wrong - it is the very thing it claims to be opposing. It is itself an act of terrorism, carried out with the intention of inspiring fear in the British public to further a political agenda.
In every way, the British government is replicating the actions it accuses PA of - except that the scale of harm to British society and the terror inspired is magnitudes greater, and performed in service of the opposite political goal.
This is a terror attack by the government against the British people.
The British people’s opinion and will are the thing from which the goverment gains it’s only source of legitimacy - and they do not line up with the government on this issue.
But evidently the government believes in a different model of legitimacy: they believe that legitimacy is derived from the mere fact that they hold power. In the mind of the government and it’s supporters, the difference between a terrorist organisation and a legitimate government is just power and only power. To them, right and wrong has absolutely nothing to do with it. They think that they are winning, and that they are going to get away with it. Nothing else matters.
Ignorance is strength freedom is slavery war is peace
But evidently the government believes in a different model of legitimacy: they believe that legitimacy is derived from the mere fact that they hold power.
*Macht macht Recht"
Every British politician belongs in a mass grave. Just a total stain on humanity
Dangerous and many voted against it. We already had politicians dead across both sides of the pond. Shouldn’t be encouraging this BS.
As long as you don’t touch Corbyn
Save some room for the American politicians though please too.
The harder they push their pro-Israel agenda, the more anti-Israel everyone is going to get.
You can’t bully us into supporting a genocidal regime.
My fucking brain is so fried.
Both my parents were in World War II. They fought against fascism. I was brought up to feel for what happened to the Jews during that war. Now all I see is that they seem to be being worse than the actual Nazis.
Israel =/= the “Jews”.
Israel’s founders were actually very prejudiced against Jews that survived the holocaust. And much more against the ones that didn’t actually…
Louder for the people in the back!
Zionists = religious nationalists / colonialists / fascists
Anti-zionists = anti-all-of-the-above
The Jewish ethnic/religious part is completely irrelevant. There are many thousands of non-jews who support Israel’s genocide, as evidenced by this batshit draconian illegitimate law. The UK/USA likely created Israel solely to destabilize the region and have an ally in the middle of the oil they needed. Within the next decade they then overthrew Irans democratically elected socialist leader because he wanted to expel British Petroleum and nationalise production (like Norway has been doing for decades).
If you just hate jews you’re some flavor of fascist or religious nationalist, so no better than zionists or any of the criminals who created this mess.
Yeah, nah.
The only people who win when you conflate Israel with all Jewish people are Zionists and Neo-Nazis.
Do not conflate Jewish people with Israel
That is a very important distinction
I guess I am ignorant in that respect. When I was taught back in the 60’s it was taught as the Jewish people and all dissidents, disabled and whoever else the nazi’s wanted out of the way.
I said what I did because in today’s world the labeling matters between Jewish people and zionists. Not because of anything that happened in WWII, but rather because you can condemn what the people in Israel are doing in Palestine and it has nothing to do with their faith.
However, there are people who will call you anti semetic for doing that and it’s just not true.
What Israel is doing is very much Nazi like. But saying such will get you banned on Mastodon.social, and probably prosecuted in places like Germany.
I was brought up to feel for what happened to the Jews during that war.
And neglected to mention that it wasn’t just jews but anyone the nazis didn’t like, such as gays, communists, other races, etc.
I did not intentionally not mention them. I was just talking about them because they were the specific topic of discussion. Of course there were others.
I have a feeling they can. If all discourse over social media is anti Palestine and no one can refute it, I give it 10 years max before it would just be a frothing hate for Palestinians with a significant amount of the population.
This is why the Fediverse and VPNs/Tor etc. are so important.
They are already trying to do this and failing miserably at it. Censorship itself is an admission of guilt and is something that people are really starting to understand. That’s basically the point of my original comment: the harder they try to stop dissent, the more guilty they look.
Information can also be spread offline.
Nonviolent direct action has earned them the label “terrorists.”
Just more newspeak, like Trump calling everything he posts online “truths” while being nothing but lie after lie.
The Ministry of Truth -> MiniTrue
Truth Social -> 💩💨
When the sentence is the same for non-violent protest and for actual terrorism, don’t be surprised if things get more extreme quickly.
“The closer the collapse of the Empire, the crazier its laws are.”
Marcus Tullius CiceroSomeoneGrrrrr, he very likely didn’t say that.
The closest to it I could find is “The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws” by Tacitus (The Annals of Imperial Rome).
Cicero lived at the end of the republic, his problem wasn’t too many laws…
Bang on mate. It’s here in the “Misattributed” section https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cicero
Cicero was world class complainer after all.
Just to be clear because everybody seems to be missing this point.
Palestinian Action, is an organisation. Membership of that group is banned, it is not illegal to support Palestinians or to call out Israel’s genocide. The government doesn’t like it when you do, but it’s not actually illegal for you to do it.
This organisation broke into a UK air force base in order to protest. They are not being charged because they protested, they’re being charged for breaking in and damaging a lot of military equipment. I think it’s a bit far to call them terrorists, but you can sort of see the government’s point, if you squint.
The UK government does however absolutely deserve to get it in the neck for their support of Israel. Labour have had a pretty awkward relationship with Israel in particular and anti-Semitism in general for a long time, and they’re now keen to be seen as supporters, but there are limits.
Thank you for this clarification. This is an extremely important context. “Palestine Action” is the particular name of a very specific organization, so the title of the article is obviously a bit misleading.
Still very worrying and more than a bit concerning, though. Here’s to hoping for a future strengthening of UK speech laws. Though, frankly, I’m not so sure about US speech laws anymore. Cheers.
Yes and I support that particular organization and the actions they perform. From what it sounds like reading the article, this very comment makes me a criminal in the UK
God bless the first amendment 🦅🇺🇲
Yeah, they lost an election over an antisemitism row a few years ago and have chosen the worst possible moment in history to start overcompensating for it.
It should be noted that it was the “please stop murdering children” kind of “antisemitism”, not real antisemitism.
The worst kind of antisemitismn, according to Isreal.
What anti-Semitism where they accused of?
I don’t think it was ever anything concrete. Some members of the Labour Party made some comments that could potentially have been interpreted as being anti-semitic. Everyone went absolutely crazy, without anything in the way of evidence, and it caused a major political scandal. Labour themselves made the whole situation infinitely worse by not properly investigating the allegations, which made it look like they were trying to protect people. In reality I think it was just incompetence.
It was the very definition of a storm in a teacup, essentially nothing had happened but the opposition parties reacted as if it was some major scandal for the sole purpose of political point scoring.
Labour subsequently lost the 2019 elections and the suggestion was it was because of this scandal.
So when Starmer became leader one of the things he said he was going to do was root out anti-Semitism within the party (no matter how much he had to dig for it), this was around 2020 but he had been campaigning about it since around 2018. Anyway when he became leader there was a big bust up where he got rid of anyone he thought was being anti-semitic (again there was a lot of doubt about whether or not they were being). Then in 2024 they won the election. So ever since then they’ve been very careful to not appear anti-semitic to the point at which they are refusing to even acknowledge Israel’s war crimes.
This is all especially annoying since they would have won the 2024 general election no matter what because the Conservatives were polling so badly. So this big arguement about anti-Semitism was completely unnecessary. Had it not happened Labour would still be in power, but would be less inclined to shy away from criticism of Israel.
TLDR
Accusing Labour of been anti-semitic has been the default position of the opposition for a while because it works. Who cares about the truth anymore?
The big you’ve skimmed over is that it happened under Corbyn, who was hugely popular with Labour members for being actually Left Wing, and hugely unpopular amongst the entire rest of the political and media establishments (including Labour MPs) for exactly the same reason. Pretty much everyone on all sides who’d never given a toss about antisemitism before were suddenly pearl-clutching over the tiniest statement made by a backbencher’s assistant’s brother’s gibbon because it was a handy way to bring Corbyn down without having to give any airtime to debating his (very popular) policies.
they’ve been very careful to not appear anti-semitic to the point at which they are refusing to even acknowledge Israel’s war crimes.
And that’s how you completely conflate the meaning of a word.
Thanks for clarifying, I’ve heard about the accusations before but never really understood what they were accused of… But I think the last couple of years of “anti-Semitism” left and right accusations aimed at individuals who are simply against the murder of innocent people help explain it. My guess is that some members of labour saw the Israeli regime for the terrorists they are ages ago and didn’t shut up about it… The Zionist lobby in the UK is obscene… Shame on these crooks!
I think it’s a bit far to call them terrorists,
Did you mean “a bit unfair”? Because I don’t see how anybody would be terrorized by this. It’s clearly illegal but using terrorism here is very problematic, especially since what the military does to people in the middle easy is actual terrorism but not called that.
Afaik the “anti-Semitism in Labour” was basically a made up smear by the Labour Party themselves to prevent Jeremy Corbyn getting elected. Not sure about other instances though.
They even forbid the playing of “Don’t cry for me Argentina” during the wer to protect their Malvinas colony.
That would have been the Conservatives though. The Conservatives under Thatcher were in power during the Falklands war.
Same as in the US, that doesn’t matter.
They will always support their regime wars.
R/D in the US or Labour/Cons in the UK.
Warcriminal Blair is a good example.The actions one political party are irrelevant to the actions of another political party. Especially over the course of such time.
If you want to make the arguement that the labour party are warmongering then there’s much that you can do to make that arguement but to equate the current situation to the Falklands war is disingenuous at absolute best.
They are not being charged because they protested, they’re being charged for breaking in and damaging a lot of military equipment. I think it’s a bit far to call them terrorists, but you can sort of see the government’s point, if you squint.
Out of curiosity, I looked up the US Federal definition of terrorism
definition
- the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that-
- involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
- appear to be intended-
- to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
- to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
- to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
- occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States
Due to the element danger to human life, their definition wouldn’t fit.
However, the UK legal definition
definition
- In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
- the action falls within subsection (2),
- the use or threat is designed to influence the government [or an international governmental organisation][1] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
- the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [, racial][2] or ideological cause.
- Action falls within this subsection if it—
- involves serious violence against a person,
- involves serious damage to property,
- endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
- creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
- is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
- The use or threat of action falling within subsection (2) which involves the use of firearms or explosives is terrorism whether or not subsection (1)(2) is satisfied.
- In this section—
- “action” includes action outside the United Kingdom,
- a reference to any person or to property is a reference to any person, or to property, wherever situated,
- a reference to the public includes a reference to the public of a country other than the United Kingdom, and
- “the government” means the government of the United Kingdom, of a Part of the United Kingdom or of a country other than the United Kingdom.
- In this Act a reference to action taken for the purposes of terrorism includes a reference to action taken for the benefit of a proscribed organisation.
is wild: no danger to human life required, merely serious damage to property suffices!
The UK definition isn’t that wild - the ‘ra used to plant bombs and then phone it in. There’s still terror seeing a building explode - knowing the only reason there aren’t casualties is because the bombers, this time, called it in with 15 minutes on the fuse.
Acts dangerous to human life don’t require actual casualties: if people need to leave to avoid death or injury, then that’s an act dangerous to human life.
In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
the action falls within subsection (2), the use or threat is designed to influence the government [or an international governmental organisation][1] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public
Wow, so the very act of peaceful protest is now defined as ‘terrorism’ because the below can be very loosely interpreted in whatever way necessary:
creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public
creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public
I don’t know: it’s possible. If legal definitions & case law (which I don’t know enough about) don’t settle their meaning, then they could mean anything. A lawyer could clarify.
For sure. e.g. Block the road, you block emergency vehicles / assault on emergency workers = terrorism.
Plain old traffic jams and collisions block emergency vehicles all the time. Doesn’t seem to be a problem during these very normal things that happen all the time … but protestors block a road and suddenly it’s a huge problem.
I see: that technically could.
- the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that-
Labour are class traitors.
So said Orwell many, many decades ago and people still vote for theae shitstains. There was some slight chance under Corbin but people want more Tory, so here we are.
Well Corbyn has just started a new party…
Has he actually because I keep hearing conflicting reports. A Labour MP left and claimed that she was joining a new party with Corbin, however I don’t think Corbin himself has actually confirmed this, and I thought he was done with politics anyway.
So this new party seemed to be carrying on the fine old tradition of the left being utterly useless at communications.
Well yes you are technically correct.
Zarah has quit Labour and Corbyn has said they will create something new. At this moment they are intending to create something new.
I wonder if any others in Labour or if any of the independants will join them. There should be a few and maybe they’ll have more than five members.
We’re also losing our freedom of speech in America, so we Americans can sympathize a bit.
You’ve actually lost your citizenship for that Thoughtcrime. Have fun in El Salvador. -people who will only stop when met with violent force
They just passed an “assault weapons ban” in my stare that has super low gun violence rates, and bans anything with a magazine, picatinny rails, forward grips, just ridiculous shit. Only 10 Republicans (the party pretending to be all for gun rights) voted against it which shows this is a concerted effort to disarm leftists and prevent us from arming ourselves while fascism breaks out in the usa and the two largest growing groups of gun owners are currently LGBTQ people and women of color. So yeah let’s concentrate weapons in the hands of police who are involved in every 1 Of twenty firearm homicides. As well as rich people and their paid mercenaries (thugs) it’s a great time to be an American
There are few things I like about being an American, but one of them is the first amendment. It doesn’t always work, and Trump is sure to try some shit like this soon, but at least I know for now I won’t go to prison for saying that I do indeed support Palestine Action
You could absolutely go to prison for it. A group of people in an unmarked van can grab you, send you to a prison in your country or even somewhere else, where you will be tortured possibly to death, and even if there will be an international fuss about it, nobody will ever do anything about it.
There is no more laws in your country, none.I could, because our rights are not bulletproof. That said, it’s not a given that I will go to jail for being against genocide
It’s not given in the UK either. At least they still have the ability to challenge that.
Do they have jury trials in the UK? This seems like a perfect use of jury nullification.
As long they can send people to torture prisons without due process or evidence, we do NOT have a First Amendment.
Or a 5th or 14th amendment
I support Palestinian action in the UK
The Met statement (https://news.met.police.uk/news/update-on-policing-in-london-following-proscription-of-palestine-action-499157) includes a ‘report your neighbour’ statement; "If you see material supporting terrorism online report it – visit www.gov.uk/ACT
You can also report suspicious activity by contacting the police in confidence on 0800 789 321."
Use this information wisely.
And i thought police in the V for Vendetta movie was extreme. Reality is a bitch.
I support Palestine action
I’m calling the rozzers
Righto chap, hop in the prison lorry then!
The Fingers noticed, the Nose is after you.
That’s good reason to remind people, that law is written by particular people, mostly to protect those people interests.
Time to make a new group and to spite them call it “palestine 2 action”
2 Palestine 2 Action
Luckily I’m not from Terf island (although things aren’t looking so good around here either), but I support Palestine action
