home  bbs  files  messages ]

      ZZUK4448             uk.legal.moderated             12811 messages      

[ previous | next | reply ]

[ list messages | list forums ]

  Msg # 12645 of 12811 on ZZUK4448, Tuesday 8-11-25, 7:48  
  From: GB  
  To: ROGER HAYTER  
  Subj: Re: Palestine Action Arrests  
 From: NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid 
  
 On 11/08/2025 13:00, Roger Hayter wrote: 
 > On 11 Aug 2025 at 12:06:21 BST, "GB"  wrote: 
 > 
 >> On 10/08/2025 23:43, Roger Hayter wrote: 
 >> 
 >>> Clearly it does not so believe. It has not repealed any of the laws 
 >>> restricting protest passed by the last government. Both Tweedledee and 
 >>> Tweedledum are taking advantage of widespread dislike of sanctimonious 
 climate 
 >>> protesters to greatly restrict our free speech and protest about issues 
 that 
 >>> may actually be important. 
 >> 
 >> Was anyone arrested for protesting about Palestine? 
 >> 
 >> Does anyone care very much about the proscribed group Palestine Action? 
 >> A group of protesters who destroyed aircraft on the flimsiest of 
 >> pretexts. I bet that most of the people arrested were completely 
 >> muddle-headed about what they were doing. 
 >> 
 >>> 
 > 
 > Which is serious, perhaps treasonous, criminal damage. But it simply 
 doesn't 
 > meet the criteria for terrorism - the essence of which is striking civilian 
 > targets to demoralise populations. Not military actions. 
  
 That's not what the Terrorism Act says, though: 
  
 "Terrorism: interpretation. 
 (1)In this Act €€€terrorism€€€ means the use or threat of action where€€€ 
  
 (a)the action falls within subsection (2), 
  
 (b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government ... or to 
 intimidate the public or a section of the public, and 
  
 (c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, 
 religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause." 
  
  
 The attack on the RAF "involves serious damage to property", as set out 
 in subsection (2), so it meets a) 
  
 The attack on the RAF was intended to influence the Government, so it 
 meets b) 
  
 And, it obviously meets c) 
  
 There were other things, eg release of an €€€Underground Manual€€€ 
 encouraging covert sabotage tactics 
  
  
 I think the organisation reached the threshold for terrorism. A better 
 argument for you to make would be that it was disproportionate to 
 proscribe them. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2) 

[ list messages | list forums | previous | next | reply ]

search for:

328,084 visits
(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca