Oh boy wait till you hear what the suffragettes were willing to do for another righteous cause, a bit over a century ago. I don’t know man, maybe the government should start reexamining its policies if ordinary people among its citizens are willing to start breaking into airbase and damaging their own planes.
They were willing to commit mass murder in London and Dublin, and to assassinate the Prime Minister. Also deeply keen on removing all Jews from the House of Commons. Things that today would indeed mark them as a terrorist organisation.
Later, Emmeline Pankhurst would found a political party with the aim of requiring all civil servants to prove their racial purity back at least 3 generations, and many of the more prominent members of the WSPU became prominent members of the British fascist movement, several being detained as a precaution during the second European fuss.
As a campaign, the WSPU was an abject failure. It put women’s votes back a decade, and Pankhurst failed to ensure that working class women were excluded from the franchise (she also wanted working class men excluded).
It was only a cataclysm the scale of WWI, and the groundwork of the suffragists working in opposition to the suffragettes, which brought votes for all.
They caused £7 million pounds damage. Now if someone damaged YOUR property and the police did nothing how would you feel? As the £7 million will now have to be found from tax payers money can you not see why the government is pissed… regardless of the cause this sort of action has consequences.
If someone damaged my property, I’d feel pretty aggrieved… and it still wouldn’t make them a terrorist. And the police wouldn’t do nothing, because damaging property is a crime. That property being a few planes doesn’t magically change the equation. Just like the government wouldn’t be doing nothing if they hadn’t designated PA as a terrorist organisation, because a whole raft of criminal charges would still apply.
Literally, and I want to stress this, literally nobody has suggested that PA should not face appropriate and proportionate consequences for their actions. And you knew that. You knew damed well that people have no problem with the government taking action, as long as that action is legal and democratically responsible. Yet you deliberately chose to dishonestly equate opposition to terrorist designation with support for them getting off scot free, even though that’s an obviously false and mendacious equivalence.
You are not very skilled at this dishonesty malarkey. Consider yourself called out.
Eh? I never said that, I just said there are consequences and people are up in arms… You took what I said and ran with it. Should they do nothing about damage that tax payers will have to pay? Really should they? I never said it wasn’t terrorism either or in fact never said it wasn’t… I’m way more aggrieved they took the winter fuel payment away from my 82 yr old mother because it directly affects me. I was pointing out, simply, that it was £7 million pounds plus damages. 7 million. Tax payers will have to pay that somehow because that is how the military is funded, directly or indirectly. Now consider yourself being called out for trying to shame me when I was just saying it is a large figure - nothing more, nothing less. Whether I feel it is proportional or not is not what I meant and you damn well know it as well, you are just as guilty of what you accuse me of. Go try and shame someone else
And… I never said anything about that. If you do something, there are consequences. Those consequences vary but when it is a large sum of money quite often the consequences are disproportionate to the crime (and we can all agree it is a crime, in the literal sense)
In 2003, anti-war activists broke into RAF Fairford to stop US bombers heading to Iraq and didn’t get any terrorism charge. It’s pretty clear that it’s all about crushing real actions against genocide
Ah “liar”. They were tankers, not fighter jets. And paint thrown in an engine requires the engine to be completely stripped down for parts to be inspected and cleaned because it’s a plane not a lawnmower. They also went at the planes with a crowbar.
The group in question broke onto an airbase and put a couple of RAF planes out of action. They crossed a red line for the government.
Oh boy wait till you hear what the suffragettes were willing to do for another righteous cause, a bit over a century ago. I don’t know man, maybe the government should start reexamining its policies if ordinary people among its citizens are willing to start breaking into airbase and damaging their own planes.
They were willing to commit mass murder in London and Dublin, and to assassinate the Prime Minister. Also deeply keen on removing all Jews from the House of Commons. Things that today would indeed mark them as a terrorist organisation.
Later, Emmeline Pankhurst would found a political party with the aim of requiring all civil servants to prove their racial purity back at least 3 generations, and many of the more prominent members of the WSPU became prominent members of the British fascist movement, several being detained as a precaution during the second European fuss.
As a campaign, the WSPU was an abject failure. It put women’s votes back a decade, and Pankhurst failed to ensure that working class women were excluded from the franchise (she also wanted working class men excluded).
It was only a cataclysm the scale of WWI, and the groundwork of the suffragists working in opposition to the suffragettes, which brought votes for all.
Nothing they did makes them terrorists, no matter what you think of the action they took
They caused £7 million pounds damage. Now if someone damaged YOUR property and the police did nothing how would you feel? As the £7 million will now have to be found from tax payers money can you not see why the government is pissed… regardless of the cause this sort of action has consequences.
If someone damaged my property, I’d feel pretty aggrieved… and it still wouldn’t make them a terrorist. And the police wouldn’t do nothing, because damaging property is a crime. That property being a few planes doesn’t magically change the equation. Just like the government wouldn’t be doing nothing if they hadn’t designated PA as a terrorist organisation, because a whole raft of criminal charges would still apply.
Literally, and I want to stress this, literally nobody has suggested that PA should not face appropriate and proportionate consequences for their actions. And you knew that. You knew damed well that people have no problem with the government taking action, as long as that action is legal and democratically responsible. Yet you deliberately chose to dishonestly equate opposition to terrorist designation with support for them getting off scot free, even though that’s an obviously false and mendacious equivalence.
You are not very skilled at this dishonesty malarkey. Consider yourself called out.
Eh? I never said that, I just said there are consequences and people are up in arms… You took what I said and ran with it. Should they do nothing about damage that tax payers will have to pay? Really should they? I never said it wasn’t terrorism either or in fact never said it wasn’t… I’m way more aggrieved they took the winter fuel payment away from my 82 yr old mother because it directly affects me. I was pointing out, simply, that it was £7 million pounds plus damages. 7 million. Tax payers will have to pay that somehow because that is how the military is funded, directly or indirectly. Now consider yourself being called out for trying to shame me when I was just saying it is a large figure - nothing more, nothing less. Whether I feel it is proportional or not is not what I meant and you damn well know it as well, you are just as guilty of what you accuse me of. Go try and shame someone else
Nobody said there shouldn’t be consequences, but they have been labeled as terrorists, which is not a fair or correct response.
And… I never said anything about that. If you do something, there are consequences. Those consequences vary but when it is a large sum of money quite often the consequences are disproportionate to the crime (and we can all agree it is a crime, in the literal sense)
So in other words you had nothing to add to what we were actually talking about and decided you wanted to talk about something else instead?
I’m not supporting a genocide, why would someone damage my property?
paint
Paint and crowbars. The engines will have to be stripped down and rebuilt.
Removed by mod
Still not terrorism
An attack on military assets for a political aim.
No , terrorism is targetting civilians for political aim
So the beheading of Lee Rigby wasn’t terrorism? Your definition doesn’t match the law or the dictionary.
What this has to do with palestine action?
In 2003, anti-war activists broke into RAF Fairford to stop US bombers heading to Iraq and didn’t get any terrorism charge. It’s pretty clear that it’s all about crushing real actions against genocide
That’s over 20 years ago, before 7/7 changed strategy.
Uk has the obligation to stop all military cooperation with israel that’s the big crimes that people involved in should be in jail for up to 15 years
So, not terrorism
Removed by mod
Ah “liar”. They were tankers, not fighter jets. And paint thrown in an engine requires the engine to be completely stripped down for parts to be inspected and cleaned because it’s a plane not a lawnmower. They also went at the planes with a crowbar.