Netanyahu has been outlawed.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Palestine Action
- Thread starter philfodenswristsock
- Start date
This is correct. Whether the proscription of Palestine Action was right or wrong, there are many ways people can legitimately and legally protest about Gaza. And regardless of my views, I support their right to do that. Supporting a banned organisation isn't one of those ways however.
Yesterday was akin to someone driving their car and ramming a mobile speed camera van, resulting in a driving ban. Then driving past another, while serving that ban and flicking a v-sign at it.
And imagine if it was Yaxley-Lennon leading a march supporting a proscribed far right group. I strongly suspect the same people complaining about people being arrested en masse for supporting a banned group wouldn't be quite so vocal in their protests about mass arrests in this case.
Exactly the point I’m making here mate.
B
B
BossHog
Guest
What have you done?Donated to what?
But having hundreds of peaceful protestors arrested is evidence when it gets in the court that the proscription of PA is obvious suppression of peaceful protest.They certainly aren’t helping themselves. PA being a proscribed group is under a legal challenge let that run its course without winding up dibble.
Personally I don’t think they should be a proscribed group.
RiversideBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2020
- Messages
- 2,887
- Team supported
- Man city
If someone walked through Manchester with a placard saying "I support the KKK' as a peaceful protest. I'm pretty sure they'd deserve to be arrested. Peaceful protest does not mean you can say whatever you want as long as you don't kick off.But having hundreds of peaceful protestors arrested is evidence when it gets in the court that the proscription of PA is obvious suppression of peaceful protest.
(Pretty sure they'd be dead before being arrested, mind).
The blue phantom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 9,581
Israel won't negotiate on the Palestinian hostages who are held without any charges. They are being raped and tortured by the IDF.No one said it was - but it is certainly part of the problem.
Hamas will not negotiate, not one iota.
The blue phantom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 9,581
You do have to laugh though, It's perfectly fine for folk to walk around with a placard saying
"I support the IDF and Israels occupation"
"I support the IDF and Israels occupation"
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
You've missed the point spectacularly.
I understand the point you’re making but it does beg several questions.
1) Why haven’t the far right groups that caused massive property damage AND threat to human life been proscribed? (No one is asking them to get proscribed because they’re not terrorists either)
2) How are people supposed to protest against the government proscribing a group? Without even being able to mention their name or support the group being targeted, you’re essentially saying the public don’t have peaceful right of protest on this topic.
I understand the point you’re making but it does beg several questions.
1) Why haven’t the far right groups that caused massive property damage AND threat to human life been proscribed? (No one is asking them to get proscribed because they’re not terrorists either)
2) How are people supposed to protest against the government proscribing a group? Without even being able to mention their name or support the group being targeted, you’re essentially saying the public don’t have peaceful right of protest on this topic.
1) They have, National Action is one.
2) Thoughts on marches held in support of them with people displaying material saying they support them?
No I will not. We have been here before with s.44. Significant dissent spells trouble. The court is likely, imho, to find the prescription is lawful but will criticise the legislation in no uncertain manner. The UN will not accept the ruling nor will those human rights organisations.I don't agree with 20mph speed limits but I observe them. Well ish.
I don't consent to the laws that don't allow us to drink alcohol in view of the pitch at football matches, but I observe them as I know there would be consequences if I didn't.
There is a legal process underway to challenge the proscription and it may get overturned. Or it may get upheld. If the courts accept the proscription then will you?
It is always the correct thing to do in a democracy to kick against laws which are not democratic. The American revolution was driven by that principle and so were many freedom movements. Do you think that dissenters in Putin’s Russia should obey the law? The women’s suffrage movement, and the Pankhurst family, split on just this matter. The suffragets adopted violence but the suffragists, the original movement, obeyed the law and are forgotten. The people at Peterloo were disobeying the law; was it right to cut them down?
Lawful is not the same as democratic. Lawfulness alone can never be the stick to beat dissenters with. The principal, as always, is Democratic consent, which is not the same as personal consent, so you had better not drink a pint in CB2!
Last edited:
The Light Was Yellow Sir
Well-Known Member
If this thread was about jailing people for Facebook posts, everyone would be on the other side…
This post mentions that the proscription of PA was included in a job lot in a single Statutory order. This is most unusual. The gov did this as they feared losing if PA alone was on the order paper. A clear attempt to circumvent consent principles. It could result in an adverse finding against the gov in the court case.
I'm With Stupid
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 May 2013
- Messages
- 23,116
Depends if they were inciting violence during a riot.If this thread was about jailing people for Facebook posts, everyone would be on the other side…
This post mentions that the proscription of PA was included in a job lot in a single Statutory order. This is most unusual. The gov did this as they feared losing if PA alone was on the order paper. A clear attempt to circumvent consent principles. It could result in an adverse finding against the gov in the court case.
The government is also adamant they have far more intelligence, not in the public domain about this group, its leadership and members and what plans they have intercepted and they will release that info soon.
I won’t be expecting it!The government is also adamant they have far more intelligence, not in the public domain about this group, its leadership and members and what plans they have intercepted and they will release that info soon.
BigJoe#1
Well-Known Member
... but they aren't a terrorist organisation.You do have to laugh though, It's perfectly fine for folk to walk around with a placard saying
"I support the IDF and Israels occupation"
Who has PA lynched?If someone walked through Manchester with a placard saying "I support the KKK' as a peaceful protest. I'm pretty sure they'd deserve to be arrested. Peaceful protest does not mean you can say whatever you want as long as you don't kick off.
(Pretty sure they'd be dead before being arrested, mind).
"I support IDF genocide" = legalYou do have to laugh though, It's perfectly fine for folk to walk around with a placard saying
"I support the IDF and Israels occupation"
"I support action against the Palestine genocide" = illegal
GOULDYBOBS
Well-Known Member
Perhaps the same criteria should be applied to them... but they aren't a terrorist organisation.