| Compare and contrast on 23:48 - Jul 20 with 1624 views | Swansea_Blue |
A complete pickle. They’ve managed to effectively criminalise peaceful protest whilst simultaneously undermining trust in the police and the law. Quite an incredible own goal, but I don’t think it was by accident. Cooper was a junior minister in the department when the original Terrorism Act 2000 was brought in. It looks like she had unfinished business. I couldn’t guess why. Maybe she lacks imagination and it’s an area she’s familiar and thus comfortable in. Maybe it’s maliciousness and an authoritarian streak. Maybe the MOD and defence companies targeted by PA have been lobbying hard and she’s been bought. Who knows, but it wasn’t an accident- she knew what she was doing. |  |
|  |
| Compare and contrast on 01:09 - Jul 21 with 1506 views | Bugs |
Is this the Two-tier policing I keep hearing about? |  | | |
| Compare and contrast on 06:32 - Jul 21 with 1320 views | noggin |
Absolute shambles. I wonder what they intend to charge the PA protestors with and what they'll do when tens of thousands, inevitably, take to the streets in solidarity. |  |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 09:09 - Jul 21 with 1120 views | DJR |
On a related theme the following is from an opinion piece in today's Haaretz by a Holocaust survivor.
"When even survivors are called antisemitic
Israel and many Israelis are increasingly weaponizing the term “antisemitism.” What once denoted terrifying hatred has become a shield for deflecting legitimate criticism of government policy.
When someone, especially a non-Israeli, speaks out against our treatment of the Palestinians, not parroting Hamas propaganda but citing credible, welldocumented reports of the atrocities we’ve committed, we’re quick to slap on the antisemitism label.
This cheapening of the word makes it an instrument for avoiding accountability. Any critique, no matter how warranted, is brushed aside with the same tired refrain: antisemitism. It’s a convenient excuse, one that spares us the painful but necessary work of looking in the mirror.
Palestinians are being expelled from their homes in the West Bank. The Gaza Strip lies in ruins. Starving Palestinian children beg in the streets. Israeli soldiers are ordered to fire on civilians waiting in line for food. Knowing that this war can be stopped, how can anyone stay silent?
If I shout out, I’ll be called antisemitic. Even when the criticism is aimed at the war in Gaza, which former chiefs of the army, the Shin Bet security service and the Mossad now call futile, the response is always the same. An antisemitic Holocaust survivor? How tragic and absurd.
The overuse of “antisemitism” has stripped the term of its power. Once, antisemitism drove Israel’s isolation; today, Israel’s actions are fuelling antisemitism. What was once seen as the embodiment of the Jewish people’s struggle to survive is now increasingly perceived as a global problem, and this perception is only set to deepen.
A large majority of students protesting against Israel around the world aren’t antisemitic. Many of them, in fact, are Jews. They’re not anti-Jewish, they’re anti-Israel. And they have good reason to be. If we dismiss these voices, we’ll blind ourselves to where we’re headed." |  | | |
| Compare and contrast on 09:11 - Jul 21 with 1112 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
Could any legal types advise as to whether a sign saying "This sign should in no way be read as saying that I am a supporter of Palestinian Action" would be considered an act in support of Palestinian Action?
And is it allowable to make some of those words of different font sizes? Or is that Criminal behaviour?
Similarly, it would be great if some flags could be made which are not quite the same as Palestinian flags.
Or photos of Yasser Arafat could be held up. He was a member of the forerunner of Fatah, the group violently deposed as the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip by Hamas.
Or how about a "Yasser Arafat as leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation Action Figure"?
Or maybe a photo shoot could be arranged of a Palestinian next to the sign on Acton railway station platform?
Dadaism and absurdism are the best responses to authoritarianism and early stage Fascism. |  | | |
| Compare and contrast on 09:14 - Jul 21 with 1105 views | StokieBlue |
| Compare and contrast on 09:11 - Jul 21 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Could any legal types advise as to whether a sign saying "This sign should in no way be read as saying that I am a supporter of Palestinian Action" would be considered an act in support of Palestinian Action?
And is it allowable to make some of those words of different font sizes? Or is that Criminal behaviour?
Similarly, it would be great if some flags could be made which are not quite the same as Palestinian flags.
Or photos of Yasser Arafat could be held up. He was a member of the forerunner of Fatah, the group violently deposed as the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip by Hamas.
Or how about a "Yasser Arafat as leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation Action Figure"?
Or maybe a photo shoot could be arranged of a Palestinian next to the sign on Acton railway station platform?
Dadaism and absurdism are the best responses to authoritarianism and early stage Fascism. |
The font size part isn't that dissimilar from the protestors who got arrested for signs saying "Palestine, Action now" or "Palestine, time for Action".
Just throw some bottles and smoke flares at the police whilst trying to attack either counter protestors or the people you are protesting about. That's acceptable apparently.
SB |  | | |
| Compare and contrast on 09:17 - Jul 21 with 1092 views | Herbivore |
Two tier policing, innit. Same two tier policing that means if you're not white you're more likely to be stopped and searched, and more likely to get a custodial sentence (and a longer term) for the same offence as a white person. Think those Reform voters were right all along, just not in the way they think. |  |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 09:19 - Jul 21 with 1073 views | NthQldITFC |
| Compare and contrast on 09:09 - Jul 21 by DJR |
On a related theme the following is from an opinion piece in today's Haaretz by a Holocaust survivor.
"When even survivors are called antisemitic
Israel and many Israelis are increasingly weaponizing the term “antisemitism.” What once denoted terrifying hatred has become a shield for deflecting legitimate criticism of government policy.
When someone, especially a non-Israeli, speaks out against our treatment of the Palestinians, not parroting Hamas propaganda but citing credible, welldocumented reports of the atrocities we’ve committed, we’re quick to slap on the antisemitism label.
This cheapening of the word makes it an instrument for avoiding accountability. Any critique, no matter how warranted, is brushed aside with the same tired refrain: antisemitism. It’s a convenient excuse, one that spares us the painful but necessary work of looking in the mirror.
Palestinians are being expelled from their homes in the West Bank. The Gaza Strip lies in ruins. Starving Palestinian children beg in the streets. Israeli soldiers are ordered to fire on civilians waiting in line for food. Knowing that this war can be stopped, how can anyone stay silent?
If I shout out, I’ll be called antisemitic. Even when the criticism is aimed at the war in Gaza, which former chiefs of the army, the Shin Bet security service and the Mossad now call futile, the response is always the same. An antisemitic Holocaust survivor? How tragic and absurd.
The overuse of “antisemitism” has stripped the term of its power. Once, antisemitism drove Israel’s isolation; today, Israel’s actions are fuelling antisemitism. What was once seen as the embodiment of the Jewish people’s struggle to survive is now increasingly perceived as a global problem, and this perception is only set to deepen.
A large majority of students protesting against Israel around the world aren’t antisemitic. Many of them, in fact, are Jews. They’re not anti-Jewish, they’re anti-Israel. And they have good reason to be. If we dismiss these voices, we’ll blind ourselves to where we’re headed." |
I'm not entirely sure that the word 'antisemitism' isn't going to go the same way as the word 'terrorism' - utterly devalued and rendered effectively meaningless by calculated misuse by supposedly responsible (once upon a time, maybe) governments who manipulatively use an emotive term to appeal to people who don't want to think about anything unless it's got a easily pigeonholed label. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Compare and contrast on 09:55 - Jul 21 with 948 views | DJR |
| Compare and contrast on 09:11 - Jul 21 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Could any legal types advise as to whether a sign saying "This sign should in no way be read as saying that I am a supporter of Palestinian Action" would be considered an act in support of Palestinian Action?
And is it allowable to make some of those words of different font sizes? Or is that Criminal behaviour?
Similarly, it would be great if some flags could be made which are not quite the same as Palestinian flags.
Or photos of Yasser Arafat could be held up. He was a member of the forerunner of Fatah, the group violently deposed as the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip by Hamas.
Or how about a "Yasser Arafat as leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation Action Figure"?
Or maybe a photo shoot could be arranged of a Palestinian next to the sign on Acton railway station platform?
Dadaism and absurdism are the best responses to authoritarianism and early stage Fascism. |
It is section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000 that they have been arrested under.
This is its terms.
"13(1) A person in a public place commits an offence if he—
(a) wears an item of clothing, or
(b) wears, carries or displays an article,
in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that he is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation."
The reference to reasonable suspicion is fairly wide and it is probably it which enabled the police to arrest the person whose placard had the words "Palestine" and "Action", whilst separated, in larger type. But I think the police were stretching things too far when they dealt with the person on the Canterbury roundabout, although they obviously thought there might be reasonable suspicion.. And your first example wouldn't be covered. But your second might well be.
Here's a link to commentary on a case about section 13(1).
https://www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk/case-comment-nathan-davis-pwr-others-v-di [Post edited 21 Jul 10:50]
| | | |
| Compare and contrast on 10:02 - Jul 21 with 912 views | Blueschev |
| Compare and contrast on 09:55 - Jul 21 by DJR |
It is section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000 that they have been arrested under.
This is its terms.
"13(1) A person in a public place commits an offence if he—
(a) wears an item of clothing, or
(b) wears, carries or displays an article,
in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that he is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation."
The reference to reasonable suspicion is fairly wide and it is probably it which enabled the police to arrest the person whose placard had the words "Palestine" and "Action", whilst separated, in larger type. But I think the police were stretching things too far when they dealt with the person on the Canterbury roundabout, although they obviously thought there might be reasonable suspicion.. And your first example wouldn't be covered. But your second might well be.
Here's a link to commentary on a case about section 13(1).
https://www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk/case-comment-nathan-davis-pwr-others-v-di [Post edited 21 Jul 10:50]
|
The truth is that if you are protesting the atrocities being committed against the Palestinians you will almost certainly be sympathetic to Palestine Action.
This is such a shameful abuse of the law by an absolutely appalling, morally bankrupt government . |  | | |
| Compare and contrast on 10:11 - Jul 21 with 870 views | chicoazul |
You voted for them lads, I did try to warn you. |  |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 10:19 - Jul 21 with 845 views | Benters |
| Compare and contrast on 10:11 - Jul 21 by chicoazul |
You voted for them lads, I did try to warn you. |
For who? |  |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 10:20 - Jul 21 with 842 views | Bent_double |
| Compare and contrast on 09:19 - Jul 21 by NthQldITFC |
I'm not entirely sure that the word 'antisemitism' isn't going to go the same way as the word 'terrorism' - utterly devalued and rendered effectively meaningless by calculated misuse by supposedly responsible (once upon a time, maybe) governments who manipulatively use an emotive term to appeal to people who don't want to think about anything unless it's got a easily pigeonholed label. |
It' become an overused and powerless word now since it's been thrown at anyone critical of Israel in the past 2 years.
I know that if I were accused of being antisemitic, it wouldn't bother me, as I know that my anger is only directed at the Israeli government and those indiscriminately perpetrating violence, and killing, Palestinians.
The actions of the IDF and now the settlers in the West Bank have set the state of Israel back years in terms of relations with the rest of the world.. |  |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 11:34 - Jul 21 with 736 views | Herbivore |
| Compare and contrast on 10:11 - Jul 21 by chicoazul |
You voted for them lads, I did try to warn you. |
I voted Green. To be fair, Labour are rubbish but they are less terrible than the Tories and preferable to the charlatans in Reform. We need PR though, the two big parties have shown that even with huge majorities, they can't govern effectively. | |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 11:37 - Jul 21 with 715 views | blueasfook |
| Compare and contrast on 11:34 - Jul 21 by Herbivore |
I voted Green. To be fair, Labour are rubbish but they are less terrible than the Tories and preferable to the charlatans in Reform. We need PR though, the two big parties have shown that even with huge majorities, they can't govern effectively. |
You realise in a PR system, Reform would have a considerable contingent in parliament? |  |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 11:41 - Jul 21 with 654 views | Herbivore |
| Compare and contrast on 11:37 - Jul 21 by blueasfook |
You realise in a PR system, Reform would have a considerable contingent in parliament? |
Yes. As they should given they got a decent share of the vote. Whenever Farage's parties get any kind of power, they always show themselves up as absolutely hopeless so I don't have an issue with them being a minority player in parliament and showing everyone what a bunch of dimwitted, incompetent tw@ts they are. | |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 11:53 - Jul 21 with 586 views | blueasfook |
| Compare and contrast on 11:41 - Jul 21 by Herbivore |
Yes. As they should given they got a decent share of the vote. Whenever Farage's parties get any kind of power, they always show themselves up as absolutely hopeless so I don't have an issue with them being a minority player in parliament and showing everyone what a bunch of dimwitted, incompetent tw@ts they are. |
Based on the results of the 2024 election, parliament would look this:
Labour - 228
Con - 139
Reform - 100
Lib-Dem - 73
Green - 71
Now imagine Con and Reform forming some kind of alliance, you'd have a strong right wing, with Labour relying on Lib-Dems and Greens to back them up.
https://electoral-reform.org.uk/how-the-2024-election-could-have-looked-with-pro [Post edited 21 Jul 11:54]
| |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 11:59 - Jul 21 with 536 views | StokieBlue |
Looks fine to me, it's representative of the votes cast.
Might also start to eliminate some of the voter disenfranchisement we see when their party gets votes but no real power.
SB
Edit: I honestly have no idea why you've down voted this, I was agreeing with your breakdown of parliament and saying it might help with the dysfunctional nature of political discourse we currently have. [Post edited 21 Jul 12:08]
| | | |
| Compare and contrast on 12:01 - Jul 21 with 530 views | Herbivore |
And Labour might have to actually have some vision and make some compromises that are good for the country rather than the constant lurching to please the right wing press that seems to be their current MO. Of course, if we had PR it'd look very different as some of the Tory "left" and Labour right would probably form a separate party and you'd have the right of the Tories and left of Labour forming other parties. | |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 12:03 - Jul 21 with 513 views | Whos_blue |
The charge sheet for the anti asylum protest reads thus:
A 16-year-old from south London was arrested on suspicion of going equipped to cause criminal damage.
A 36-year-old man from Epping and a 47-year-old man from Waltham Abbey in Essex were arrested on suspicion of violent disorder under Section 2 of the Public Order Act.
A 51-year-old man from Epping was arrested on suspicion of violent disorder under Section 2 of the Public Order Act.
A 34-year-old man from Wickford in Essex was arrested on suspicion of breaching a Section 60AA, which was put in place to give police powers to force people to remove face coverings.
A 17-year-old man from North Weald in Essex was arrested on suspicion of causing criminal damage to a vehicle.
Not one arrested for carrying a sign.
Lightweights. |  |
| Distortion becomes somehow pure in its wildness. |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 12:06 - Jul 21 with 497 views | blueasfook |
| Compare and contrast on 12:01 - Jul 21 by Herbivore |
And Labour might have to actually have some vision and make some compromises that are good for the country rather than the constant lurching to please the right wing press that seems to be their current MO. Of course, if we had PR it'd look very different as some of the Tory "left" and Labour right would probably form a separate party and you'd have the right of the Tories and left of Labour forming other parties. |
True. It might make them (Labour) less "Tory lite" trying to please both sides of the electorate and managing neither! | |
| |
| Compare and contrast on 12:44 - Jul 21 with 382 views | Trequartista |
| Compare and contrast on 12:06 - Jul 21 by blueasfook |
True. It might make them (Labour) less "Tory lite" trying to please both sides of the electorate and managing neither! |
For me, an opinion on how good or bad the parties are is not relevant, either a party is banned or not banned, so once it passes that test there should be no further scrutiny of suitability. If reform or green get 25% vote they should have 25% seats - that's democratic - so I am in favour of PR |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
