5 ms·

If you're looking for evidence of the UK gov's authoritarian tendencies, you don't need to go looking at videos on Youtube, just look at the number of arrests o

If you're looking for evidence of the UK gov's authoritarian tendencies, you don't need to go looking at videos on Youtube, just look at the number of arrests of peaceful protestors who were given charges under terrorism legislation for holding up banners or wearing T-Shirts mentioning "Palestine Action" (ref https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/sep/25/fate-of-hundreds-arrested-for-alleged-palestine-action-support-in-limbo-if-challenge-to-ban-is-blocked-court-told https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/sep/25/fate-of-hund...). Or indeed in one notable case the person who was arrested for a T-Shirt about "Plasticine action"

ChocolateGod 1y ago
They're supporting a specific group that went into a military base and damaged military equipment (that was irrelevant to palestine/israel), those people going out with those T-Shirts know exactly why the group was proscribed and are seeking to be arrested, why are we shocked they got arrested, they wanted it.
- raesene9 1y ago
  Put it this way, the UK managed to get through the troubles, which had a lot of events far more serious than what Palestine action have done, without needing this level of policing of free speech. The point I was making is that successive UK gov's are tending towards authoritarianism, the current one included.
  - Barrin92 1y ago
    If you're trying to convince Brits not to enact these policies "you guys made it through The Troubles" is a really bad argument unless you're very unfamiliar with the body count and terror and the public perception of that period in British history. (it included some fifty thousand casualties and sixteen thousand bombings) An advocate of these policies would quite literally argue that not getting into something like The Troubles is the point and a lot of people would agree if that was what is on the horizon.
    - raesene9 1y ago
      Can't say as I agree there. I was in the UK at the time (lived here all my life) and I'm fairly familiar with the horrors of the time. My point is we were able to get through something like that, which was very serious, without needing to proscribe free speech in the way that's being done now for some people putting paint on planes. So if we didn't need it for something that serious, we don't need it for this.
- LightBug1 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - TiredOfLife 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - LightBug1 1y ago
      You'd do well in 1930's Germany. Apt.
      - TiredOfLife 1y ago
        Those creatures destroyed supplies meant for Ukraine.
  - ChocolateGod 1y ago
    Damaging military equipment responsible for defending the country for a political goal is terrorism. They attacked the state.
    - LightBug1 1y ago
      ... "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims." No. It's. Not. But even if you disagree with the dictionary and me. These kind of nuisance resistance acts have happened countless times in the past without serious punishment. They're taken for what they are. It's only recently, as we move towards something darker, and laws created for actual terrorism begin to be used against the citizens. Perhaps you're the kind of wanker who welcomes that.
- NVHacker 1y ago
  Maybe those people are trying to make the point that if the government can, without public scrutiny, declare any organisation as terrorist and then arrest anyone who wears t-shirts mentioning that organisation - then the government has way too much power.
mikevm 1y ago
[dead]
multjoy 1y ago
That’s because Palestine Action are a proscribed group. Whether or not the proscription was correct is irrelevant, the current law means that you commit the same offence showing support for IS or the Terrorgram Collective. The police can’t simply ignore one proscribed group over another as that leads to all manner of weird and wacky outcomes.
- raesene9 1y ago
  The legislation which causes anyone expressing support of a proscribed group is the authoritarian thing I'm talking about. The Terrorism Act 2000 as implemented is the problem. Having a law that means merely expressing support of a group, leads to criminal charges is not something I think should be in place in any country that pretends to support freedom of speech.
- michaelt 1y ago
  But they're only a proscribed group because the cabinet decided it was politically convenient to proscribe them. It's not like these guys are the Taliban or the IRA, though some of them did chuck some paint on some planes. So a person who is worried about Starmer's authoritarian tendencies lay responsibility for the police action at the door of number 10.
  - AftHurrahWinch 1y ago
    They destroyed "drone and aircraft machinery" [0] at APPH and at Teledyne "damage to the clean rooms could halt production for up to 12 months" [1]. [0]: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-57403049 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-57403049 [1]: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/pro-palestine-activists-damage-factory-building-f-35-parts/ https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/pro-palestine-activists-dama...
    - MrJohz 1y ago
      That's an argument for arresting and imprisoning a bunch of people for criminal damage, not an argument for proscribing an entire organisation and limiting their free speech. The argument here is not the PA should be let off scot free. The argument is that proscribing them as an organisation is a massive and authoritarian overreaction to their actions.
vr46 1y ago
[flagged]
FridayoLeary 1y ago
I'm actually very pro israel and i agree with you on this. It's "two tier" kier at his finest. Labour have demonstrated they have no problem using the police and judiciary to go after anyone who causes them problems. And they somehow convince themselves they have the moral high ground from which to lecture everyone else. Even conservatives with all their indifference and contempt for the British public were never so dishonest.

ChocolateGod 1y ago

They're supporting a specific group that went into a military base and damaged military equipment (that was irrelevant to palestine/israel), those people going out with those T-Shirts know exactly why the group was proscribed and are seeking to be arrested, why are we shocked they got arrested, they wanted it.

raesene9 1y ago
Put it this way, the UK managed to get through the troubles, which had a lot of events far more serious than what Palestine action have done, without needing this level of policing of free speech. The point I was making is that successive UK gov's are tending towards authoritarianism, the current one included.
- Barrin92 1y ago
  If you're trying to convince Brits not to enact these policies "you guys made it through The Troubles" is a really bad argument unless you're very unfamiliar with the body count and terror and the public perception of that period in British history. (it included some fifty thousand casualties and sixteen thousand bombings) An advocate of these policies would quite literally argue that not getting into something like The Troubles is the point and a lot of people would agree if that was what is on the horizon.
  - raesene9 1y ago
    Can't say as I agree there. I was in the UK at the time (lived here all my life) and I'm fairly familiar with the horrors of the time. My point is we were able to get through something like that, which was very serious, without needing to proscribe free speech in the way that's being done now for some people putting paint on planes. So if we didn't need it for something that serious, we don't need it for this.
LightBug1 1y ago
[flagged]
- TiredOfLife 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - LightBug1 1y ago
    You'd do well in 1930's Germany. Apt.
    - TiredOfLife 1y ago
      Those creatures destroyed supplies meant for Ukraine.
- ChocolateGod 1y ago
  Damaging military equipment responsible for defending the country for a political goal is terrorism. They attacked the state.
  - LightBug1 1y ago
    ... "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims." No. It's. Not. But even if you disagree with the dictionary and me. These kind of nuisance resistance acts have happened countless times in the past without serious punishment. They're taken for what they are. It's only recently, as we move towards something darker, and laws created for actual terrorism begin to be used against the citizens. Perhaps you're the kind of wanker who welcomes that.
NVHacker 1y ago
Maybe those people are trying to make the point that if the government can, without public scrutiny, declare any organisation as terrorist and then arrest anyone who wears t-shirts mentioning that organisation - then the government has way too much power.

mikevm 1y ago

[dead]

multjoy 1y ago

That’s because Palestine Action are a proscribed group. Whether or not the proscription was correct is irrelevant, the current law means that you commit the same offence showing support for IS or the Terrorgram Collective. The police can’t simply ignore one proscribed group over another as that leads to all manner of weird and wacky outcomes.

raesene9 1y ago
The legislation which causes anyone expressing support of a proscribed group is the authoritarian thing I'm talking about. The Terrorism Act 2000 as implemented is the problem. Having a law that means merely expressing support of a group, leads to criminal charges is not something I think should be in place in any country that pretends to support freedom of speech.
michaelt 1y ago
But they're only a proscribed group because the cabinet decided it was politically convenient to proscribe them. It's not like these guys are the Taliban or the IRA, though some of them did chuck some paint on some planes. So a person who is worried about Starmer's authoritarian tendencies lay responsibility for the police action at the door of number 10.
- AftHurrahWinch 1y ago
  They destroyed "drone and aircraft machinery" [0] at APPH and at Teledyne "damage to the clean rooms could halt production for up to 12 months" [1]. [0]: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-57403049 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-57403049 [1]: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/pro-palestine-activists-damage-factory-building-f-35-parts/ https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/pro-palestine-activists-dama...
  - MrJohz 1y ago
    That's an argument for arresting and imprisoning a bunch of people for criminal damage, not an argument for proscribing an entire organisation and limiting their free speech. The argument here is not the PA should be let off scot free. The argument is that proscribing them as an organisation is a massive and authoritarian overreaction to their actions.

vr46 1y ago

[flagged]

FridayoLeary 1y ago

I'm actually very pro israel and i agree with you on this. It's "two tier" kier at his finest. Labour have demonstrated they have no problem using the police and judiciary to go after anyone who causes them problems. And they somehow convince themselves they have the moral high ground from which to lecture everyone else. Even conservatives with all their indifference and contempt for the British public were never so dishonest.