Remember that legality does not always equate to morality. I’m not sure it applies in the case of Palestine Action themselves, but sometimes it is the morally correct thing to act in an illegal way.
1 Like
Don’t like it? Vote against it then. I believe only Jeremy Corbyn’s new extreme left party will be your only choice
I think extreme left is probably a bit of a stretch, I don’t agree with much that he says but lots of it would’ve been mainstream in the 1970’s.
I do wonder if he’s a secret 5th columnist who wants to see Nigel Farage as PM but that’s probably a subject for another thread.
The Greens all opposed it too.
1 Like
Back on the Brize topic, I seethe Voyager is back in service already.
Seen at Birmingham, coming in from Akrotiri yesterday, still paint damaged but serviceable.
4 Likes
Now that it’s been proscribed as a terrorist organisation with the amount of support still being shown for it on social media. I suspect the CT Internet Referral Unit are going to be extremely busy dealing with reports. The Campaign Against anti-Semitism has already said they will bring private prosecutions in England if appropriate police force & CPS don’t do it themselves.
I wonder how long it will be till someone in this organisation posts something in support of what is now a proscribed terrorist organisation on their social media or in public and it is reported and how RAFAC will deal with it.
The PREVENT program, that’s what it’s there for 
2 Likes
I’m always amazed by your ability to be apparently astride the news, and get legal reporting almost always wrong.
Palestine Action applied for interim relied to the High Court, to not be proscribed while a full Judicial Review is undertaken. That what the High Court refused to grant.
Full JR is still to be heard. With plenty of rights of appeal.
I assume that an organisation can be de-proscribed through a similar process to proscription.
Jumped on to Facebook this morning and this is now a friend’s profile picture.
Would you have him arrested for terrorism offences?
1 Like
Yes.
Principles. Plus i dont like people
6 Likes
With the way the law is, this is arrestable under the terrorism act and the punishment is prison. This is illegal.
I think that’s silly though.
Would I have them arrested? No. I think it’s silly. I also think it would be a waste of police time, we don’t have the prison space, and realistically, I can’t see it being in the public interest to go after hundreds of people with a specific profile picture.
1 Like
Arrested, no: but I’d certainly be blocking that account and referring it to UKSV if they held any form of clearance.
There’s no difference from waving a flag in the street & “waving” the same flag on social media.
Therefore, you can’t ignore the offence. Arrest them, they want to make a point of protest, so be it.
2 Likes
He’s nothing to do with the forces. Last I spoke with this chap, he was employed by a local authority but not in any role that requires vetting nor even a DBS.
If it was up dated before then no,
if it was updated after then yes you should report but it’s always an individuals personal decision.
Perhaps the cop out is report to Facebook so you’ve taken action but not anything official official
1 Like
This is the thing people are fixating on the straw that broke the camels back, not the series of offences including the ones that used violence and weapons.
I still think it’s dangerous, to focus exclusively on damage over harm to people is a bad precedent.
We’re in a state now where supporting the suffragettes would have got you arrested.
2 Likes
But how can they be a proscribed terrorist organization if none of then are even charged with terrorism?! This is the bit that gets me. The home sec has decided it’s terrorism. But there have been no charges brought against any of them so far for terrorism.
The proscribed organisation should be for terrorists. Although some may think PA met that criteria, the complete lack to charges says otherwise…
No members of National Action were charged with Terrorism prior to its proscription, in fact at a quick Google I can’t find evidence that any members were charged with any crimes prior to it being banned.
1 Like
You’ve answered your own question.
To quote from the parliament website
This is the what the law is as debated & implement by the elected representatives in parliament & enacted by judges under the terrorism act 2000 (although there was also proscription prior to then mainly for Northern Ireland based organisations).
When you look at the definition for the Home Secretary it is quite broad & when you look at the activities & behaviours of P.A. it probably does fall into this definition.
The list of proscribed organisations are here:
1 Like