Rendered at 14:19:03 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
absqueued 16 hours ago [-]
Sometimes it feels like the West is going backwards. Censoring voices and publications due to expression of freedom? Back to Victorian era soon I guess.
tourmalinetaco 16 hours ago [-]
Absolutely. The fact that you can be fined or jailed in Germany for insulting politicians like Friedrich Merz is insane. And of course, he’s perfectly allowed to call his opponents whatever he pleases if it benefits him. Now I wonder what other regime in Germany’s past has laws against criticizing the chancellor…
15 hours ago [-]
bbg2401 16 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
chownie 15 hours ago [-]
The justification isn't that good, it's "damage to property" repeatedly which yeah criminal but not terrorism. The UK's proscription of Palestine Action is hanging on by threadbare credibility, it's political.
roryirvine 5 hours ago [-]
The ban came because they damaged military aircraft, and most other countries' anti-terrorism laws would also have applied if the same thing had been done to their militaries - the UK is far from an outlier here.
The better questions are whether Pal Action deliberately sought to provoke the ban and, if so, whether it's a good idea to have given them what they appear to have wanted.
They certainly don't seem to pose as much of a threat to national security as other proscribed groups so there's no solid functional case for banning them, merely the purely legalistic one.
bbg2401 15 hours ago [-]
Damage to property including military bases, damage to property considered to be Jewish-owned, and a documented list of targets including charities, government buildings and financial institutions.
Let’s not trivialise such activities.
We’re firmly beyond the pale when you use a decommissioned prison van as a battering ram, attack security personnel with a sledgehammer and mark people with spray paint.
chownie 5 hours ago [-]
That is the prepared attack line the Govt have armed you with yes, but if you scroll the document and compare them to every other proscribed group it's sort of clear they're not terrorists, and the UK populace seem to similarly feel this is silly politicking.
> damage to property considered to be Jewish-owned
I could not possibly take you less seriously after this, you are mixing your narratives up into something no one will swallow.
gersitbav 2 hours ago [-]
Palestine Action vandalised _Jewish_ property. Not Israeli, not Zionist, just a Jewish-owned shop (where the owners happen to be Orthodox and anti-Zionists) in a Jewish neighbourhood, to bring fear into the Jewish community in echoes of Kristallnacht.
It’s ironic when a “pro-Palestine” movement is working to convince Jews they are not safe outside of Israel.
15 hours ago [-]
SpecialistK 14 hours ago [-]
The gap in my understanding is, why this particular group? There are endless groups and movements in favour of the Palestinian cause that haven't been marked by the UK's overbearing security state, so why not just lend her support to one of those instead?
pygar 14 hours ago [-]
This is a direct action group that attempts to disrupt organisations that support or trade with Israel. The other ones just uselessly annoy passers-by in a few state sanctioned streets for a few hours.
She is an avowed Communist (and Irish) this group might just fit her world view.
butlersean 7 hours ago [-]
I think the issue here is: the books could be for sale but the publisher doesn’t want the liability of having supported PA via funds. They could sell the books and not pay the author but that’s a different moral problem.
Fred27 4 hours ago [-]
What a deliberately misleading headline. She can sell books in the UK. She just can't give the money from those sales to terrorists - and she has said she intends to.
14 hours ago [-]
17 hours ago [-]
rekabis 12 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
483938373993 14 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
OgsyedIE 16 hours ago [-]
The UK populace has immense opposition to Westminster's handling of the events because of a great lack of transparency.
If they were told the truth (that the country has to do what the White House says or else the new blackshirts do to Downing Street as they've recently rehearsed in Southampton, Belfast, Rotherham and Hull, plus the UK police and troop numbers are too small to affect the outcome) they could start to think more realistically about the situation.
bbg2401 16 hours ago [-]
There is so much misinformation in your comment that it’s difficult to find a good place to start. Even if one were to bother, you’ve started from such a point of disingenuousness that it would be futile.
The better questions are whether Pal Action deliberately sought to provoke the ban and, if so, whether it's a good idea to have given them what they appear to have wanted.
They certainly don't seem to pose as much of a threat to national security as other proscribed groups so there's no solid functional case for banning them, merely the purely legalistic one.
Let’s not trivialise such activities.
We’re firmly beyond the pale when you use a decommissioned prison van as a battering ram, attack security personnel with a sledgehammer and mark people with spray paint.
> damage to property considered to be Jewish-owned
I could not possibly take you less seriously after this, you are mixing your narratives up into something no one will swallow.
It’s ironic when a “pro-Palestine” movement is working to convince Jews they are not safe outside of Israel.
She is an avowed Communist (and Irish) this group might just fit her world view.
If they were told the truth (that the country has to do what the White House says or else the new blackshirts do to Downing Street as they've recently rehearsed in Southampton, Belfast, Rotherham and Hull, plus the UK police and troop numbers are too small to affect the outcome) they could start to think more realistically about the situation.