Yesterday marked one of the most shameful days in the history of the Metropolitan Police as they arrested peaceful protesters including a blind man in a wheelchair, an 81-year-old woman with Parkinson’s, a former British army officer, and a bunch of, um, Quakers. All of them were protesting against two things: the UK’s ongoing participation in the Gaza genocide and the proscription of Palestine Action. All of them were arrested under the Terrorism Act.
Imagine being the police officer whose job it was to wheel this man away. You can see the shame in his face as he lowers his head. These officers must know history is not going to judge them kindly, but they must also know just following orders is not okay. If I was a police officer, I would not have made those arrests, even if it cost me my job. Doing the right thing is infinitely more important than just following orders.
Yesterday police made twice the number of counter-terrorism arrests than they did in all of 2023 and one-fifth of those arrested were over 70. One police officer was wearing a hat that suggested he came from a Welsh police force. Remember this when police say they can’t send any officers out after you’ve been burgled. Police are dealing with the real criminals now, and the real criminals include quakers. Yes, quakers were arrested.
Not sure why you’re asking. Do you just need examples of people convicted of supporting ISIS or do you have some other point?
Because you’re equating Palestine Action with fucking ISIS and indirectly called them a “terrorist organization.”
No, I’m using them as a suitable comparison because they are also a proscribed organisation.
The whole fucking point is that while PA is not a terrorist organisation, ISIS undoubtedly is. The fact that no-one has chipped in to say that (disabled) supporters of ISIS should be immune from prosecution shows that the principle of arresting people for supporting terrorist organisations is not the issue; the issue is that PA has been proscribed as a terrorist organisation when it is not one.
You can tell that I wasn’t “indirectly calling PA a terrorist organisation” because I said:
and
I am asking which of the protestors that supported Palestine action are supporting isis
That “if” indicates that the sentence is a hypothetical. It’s not about the protestors in the article.
So you are off topic. The article clearly talks about those who was arrested simply for supporting palestine action
FYI if you had written “Who is supporting ISIS? because this article is about those who were arrested for supporting Palestine Action” then we could have been here 2 hours ago.
The article claimed that people should not be arrested for supporting Palestine Action if they are disabled. A gave an example where I think you should be arrested (and convicted) for supporting a terrorist organisation, even if you are disabled.
Do you fail to see the connection? Do you think disability should make you immune from arrest for supporting a terror organisation (like ISIS)?
The problem is not that disabled people were arrested, it’s that Palestine Action is not a terror organisation.
You truly earned that nick. Last time I knew a chick like that, she actually claimed to be a descendand of an old CIA. Which she gave such a kind description of, I knew she was a fucking asset. Also, that she didn’t even know it even though they fucking told her. Practically, anyway
Good luck getting that. I know better like the Ledger.
They never alleged they did.