More than 425 people have been arrested at the largest demonstration yet opposing the proscription of Palestine Action.
Defend Our Juries, who organised the demonstrations, said there were 1,500 sign-holders in Parliament Square on Saturday at a fresh protest in London against the ban. At the previous major demonstration last month, 532 people were arrested for taking part. Participants gathered in Parliament Square by 1pm, many holding signs that read: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”
At just after 9pm, the Metropolitan police said it had made more than 425 arrests. The Met’s deputy assistant commissioner, Claire Smart, who led the operation, said: “In carrying out their duties today, our officers have been punched, kicked, spat on and had objects thrown at them by protesters. It is intolerable that those whose job it is to enforce the law and keep people safe – in this case arresting individuals committing offences under the Terrorism Act – should be subject to this level of abuse.”
So they vandalized some planes and snipped some cables? And this got them declared as terrorists?
I’ve noticed a pattern where “terrorist” is often used as a stand in for any group that opposes the government.
Well, that was one of their actions. I mean, it might be daily business for you… But for me, getting access to fighter jets, sabotaging them and doing whatever else they did there does not sound like usual activity that some other organization would do. I have never head of someone from an LGBT organization seen sabotaging fighter jets… During BLM, there was also no organization sabotaging fighter jets or anything remotely similar to it.
Organizing a protest on the streets is the base form of “opposing”. Sabotaging stuff by breaking the law is for sure also “opposing”, but I don’t think, we should put that on the same level.
And did any of those actions threaten or cause fear in the public?
Probably not, but is that even necessary? No, it is not.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
Well the action was vandalism against two military planes, so that seems pretty well targeted against… Well, they’re inanimate objects, so I wouldn’t really describe it as violence, nor the planes as combatants or noncombatants themselves. So yeah it shouldn’t be considered terrorism.
Unless you’re a military plane contributing to genocide. I don’t think any people in the UK are planes.
Im not saying what they did isn’t illegal. I’m saying it’s not terrorism. This is like if someone was charged with murder and punished for it only to turn out all they did was rob a store and you’re like “well akshually ☝️🤓 they’re a criminal so it’s fine”
I mean, it may not match how you use that word, because you might think about bin Laden when hearing that word “terrorism”, but let’s see how the word is actually defined:
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
So let’s look at these requirements:
violence: not really. Vandalism and destruction of equipment aren’t violence, to my knowledge PA has not harmed or attacked anyone.
non combatants: they targeted weapon shipments and military equipment. While I suppose you could argue the UK military aren’t combatants as they aren’t part of the war directly, but honestly that point is entirely moot given that they didn’t target people.
political and ideological aims: sure, they are a political activist organization. Obviously that alone doesn’t make them terrorists.
So, even by what Wikipedia defines as the “broadest” definition, not terrorists.
I mean, at an absolute minimum, terrorism requires violence against people, which they did not do. They targeted planes and other military equipment. That’s not terrorism no matter how much damage they caused.