Palestine Action

[Tuerto]

It's called 'nuance' Bob.

Yeah, Jimbo likes that word, He gets it mixed up with the word 'Wrong'

[the other bob wilson]

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ain-government

[JamesWales]

You're at the bottom of the Grand Canyon on this, Jimbo. Keep digging and you'll likely hit your homeland of Hades.

For understanding why a policy of targeting the military could get you proscribed and for understanding that supporting such groups will get you arrested. Some canyon!

[cyril evans awaydays]

For understanding why a policy of targeting the military could get you proscribed and for understanding that supporting such groups will get you arrested. Some canyon!

Look, I think most contributors realise you have some personal need to serve about your intellect and debating skills but you are making yourself look slightly ridiculous when viewed over time.

Farmers blocking roads about inheritance tax or other grievances, let's start threads about stupid government picking silly fights against those with just cause.

Just Stop Oil or Extinction Rebellion causing disruption, idiots stopping people going about their legitimate business.

That's before this little charade about when you think it is right and proper for people to disobey or break the law. Answer, in your own words, when you think a law is stupid breaking it should not be punishable and when you think it sound then those breaking it should be punished.

Most contributors to this section of the board have polarised views and favour a certain type of protestor. You seem unique in thinking you are some voice of consistent reason about the merits of a protest or law break, despite all the evidence to the contrary!

[delmbox]

For understanding why a policy of targeting the military could get you proscribed and for understanding that supporting such groups will get you arrested. Some canyon!

Take the L and walk away James

[JamesWales]

Look, I think most contributors realise you have some personal need to serve about your intellect and debating skills but you are making yourself look slightly ridiculous when viewed over time.

Farmers blocking roads about inheritance tax or other grievances, let's start threads about stupid government picking silly fights against those with just cause.

Just Stop Oil or Extinction Rebellion causing disruption, idiots stopping people going about their legitimate business.

That's before this little charade about when you think it is right and proper for people to disobey or break the law. Answer, in your own words, when you think a law is stupid breaking it should not be punishable and when you think it sound then those breaking it should be punished.

Most contributors to this section of the board have polarised views and favour a certain type of protestor. You seem unique in thinking you are some voice of consistent reason about the merits of a protest or law break, despite all the evidence to the contrary!

Weird for someone forensic enough to spend their time trawling through old posts is not able to Google the difference between the examples you give and farmers, extinction rebellion or anyone else, is that one group is illegal and the other isn't.

You could ask yourself why the government did that but of course that would require you to consider for a short moment that maybe you backed the wrong horse here and shock of shocks, you and others may be wrong. Heaven forbid, it seems unlikely, but maybe thats possible?! Clearly there is a grand conspiracy at play! Even Bob said the police and govt are probably lying about engine costs.

Yes, people do have polarized views. If it were another group destroying something for their own end (let's say lifeboats or police vehicles or fire engines) and they were a proscribed right-wing group you would all be demanding the police take action...Sludge would be calling people Nazis faster than you can count to ten. When it suits you, you don't want it.

I don't think I'm unique in being a voice I reason and never remotely said that (you are superb at targeting strawmen I'll grant you that!)

I'm just happy to devolve the law to (checks notes) umm lawmakers instead of a bunch of old lefties on a football message board!

[az city]

Jimbo, have you ever heard of "jurisprudence"?

You clearly have absolutely zero understanding of it.

With proscription, you want to define right and wrong with reference to legality. It appears legality overrides all opinions for you.

With breaking traffic laws, you want to ignore your own legality argument as it doesn't suit your opinion that the law is wrong.

You can't have it both ways.

[chrisp_1927]

Reading that, you can only be grateful that those who got stupid and unfair laws changed down the centuries, sometimes paying with their lives for their beliefs, defied the powers that be of their day, rather than adapt your rather moveable acceptance of obeying the law of the land, All you've done for nearly a day now is talk to us as if we're too dense to understand the only point you keep on making to justify your opinion - everyone understands what you're saying, it's not as if it will all suddenly click into place and we'll say "James Wales was right you know".

Also, what was this "targetting" of UK Military equipment you talk about? They spray painted it, does spray painting stop modern and sophisticated weaponry working? Does it destroy it? How does spray painting anything warrant an accusation of terrorism and proscribing of the organisation responsible?

I'd imagine 'spray painting' a load of paint does do a little bit to the inside of an engine tbh. Not sure I'd fancy flying on something that had taken 25 litres of Dulux right into it's fan 🤣

[the other bob wilson]

Weird for someone forensic enough to spend their time trawling through old posts is not able to Google the difference between the examples you give and farmers, extinction rebellion or anyone else, is that one group is illegal and the other isn't.

You could ask yourself why the government did that but of course that would require you to consider for a short moment that maybe you backed the wrong horse here and shock of shocks, you and others may be wrong. Heaven forbid, it seems unlikely, but maybe thats possible?! Clearly there is a grand conspiracy at play! Even Bob said the police and govt are probably lying about engine costs.

Yes, people do have polarized views. If it were another group destroying something for their own end (let's say lifeboats or police vehicles or fire engines) and they were a proscribed right-wing group you would all be demanding the police take action...Sludge would be calling people Nazis faster than you can count to ten. When it suits you, you don't want it.

I don't think I'm unique in being a voice I reason and never remotely said that (you are superb at targeting strawmen I'll grant you that!)

I'm just happy to devolve the law to (checks notes) umm lawmakers instead of a bunch of old lefties on a football message board!

Except the law makers who bought in the 20 mph speed limit it seems.

[JamesWales]

Jimbo, have you ever heard of "jurisprudence"?

You clearly have absolutely zero understanding of it.

With proscription, you want to define right and wrong with reference to legality. It appears legality overrides all opinions for you.

With breaking traffic laws, you want to ignore your own legality argument as it doesn't suit your opinion that the law is wrong.

You can't have it both ways.

In which case, neither can you! As for the prescription, we will all have opinions, but it is up to lawmakers to determine what should and shouldn't be proscribed and it is entirely understandable that they will enforce it, especially for something as serious as proscribed groups.

[JamesWales]

Except the law makers who bought in the 20 mph speed limit it seems.

Nope, I entirely agree that speed limits should be set by local authorities too, and people should expect a level of enforcement that goes with it

[jon1959]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...nisters-claims

[az city]

In which case, neither can you! As for the prescription, we will all have opinions, but it is up to lawmakers to determine what should and shouldn't be proscribed and it is entirely understandable that they will enforce it, especially for something as serious as proscribed groups.

You're an idiot.

[JamesWales]

Quick summary of the last few days here since I agreed(!!) with Delmbox's post, writing:

"Indeed, but they are a proscribed group so she chose to wear that t-shirt knowing she would be arrested and the costs and officer time that entailed"

For that position we get the following;

Sludge:
"Get your daft old racist on the case"

"execute all the protestors -JamesWales"

"You stupid fecking cnnt" (Subsequently deleted it seems)

Bob
"Being contrarian and being a prat"

"Your views are becoming ever more extreme"

AZ
"You have a slavish devotion to a pedantic and idiotic position"

"You're at the bottom of the Grand Canyon on this, Jimbo. Keep digging and you'll likely hit your homeland of Hades."

"you're an idiot"

Added to that we have Bob giving birth to some conspiracy (with no evidence) that the police and the govt are lying about the cost of airplane engine damage and we have a couple of the other usual suspects making insinuations here and there.

And why? Firstly for trusting devolving the implementation of the law to lawmakers (A Labour govt no less!) who were led by an MI5 report. Secondly for understanding that the police need to enforce laws without prejudice and thirdly for saying that people who openly break the law should expect to get nicked. All the while recognizing it's a contentious issue and stating a couple of times that protestors should not be aggressively dealt with nor harshly sentenced.

Barely more than a year ago a load of us got called idiots and fascists by the same kind of people above for NOT supporting a potential Labour Govt. Not we get called the same for having the temerity TO support the principle of enforcing the laws they've introduced. The constant theme being if we don't wholly agree with whatever your position is then you will get personal abuse.

For essentially supporting a government and police force instead of some conspiracy theory and online opinions Bob calls me extreme, Sludge calls me a cnnt and AZ calls me an idiot. Cyril accepts people have polarized opinions and seems to think that settling these things with laws introduced by an the govt is not the solution. So what is?!

At what point do you guys realize how irrational you sound? You are behaving exactly the same way a lot of the MAGA, antivax, far-right trolls sound on the internet.

You may be right on Palestine Action. You may not. You may be right on Lucy Letby or any other legal issue too, but devolving this decision to a government aware of more of the facts of the case than any of us is absolutely NOT extreme. It's the norm.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Nope, I entirely agree that speed limits should be set by local authorities too, and people should expect a level of enforcement that goes with it

In this case I think it's stupid and if I think a law is stupid then I don't think breaking it should be punishable.

[Dave Blue]

Quick summary of the last few days here since I agreed(!!) with Delmbox's post, writing:

"Indeed, but they are a proscribed group so she chose to wear that t-shirt knowing she would be arrested and the costs and officer time that entailed"

For that position we get the following;

Sludge:
"Get your daft old racist on the case"

"execute all the protestors -JamesWales"

"You stupid fecking cnnt" (Subsequently deleted it seems)

Bob
"Being contrarian and being a prat"

"Your views are becoming ever more extreme"

AZ
"You have a slavish devotion to a pedantic and idiotic position"

"You're at the bottom of the Grand Canyon on this, Jimbo. Keep digging and you'll likely hit your homeland of Hades."

"you're an idiot"

Added to that we have Bob giving birth to some conspiracy (with no evidence) that the police and the govt are lying about the cost of airplane engine damage and we have a couple of the other usual suspects making insinuations here and there.

And why? Firstly for trusting devolving the implementation of the law to lawmakers (A Labour govt no less!) who were led by an MI5 report. Secondly for understanding that the police need to enforce laws without prejudice and thirdly for saying that people who openly break the law should expect to get nicked. All the while recognizing it's a contentious issue and stating a couple of times that protestors should not be aggressively dealt with nor harshly sentenced.

Barely more than a year ago a load of us got called idiots and fascists by the same kind of people above for NOT supporting a potential Labour Govt. Not we get called the same for having the temerity TO support the principle of enforcing the laws they've introduced. The constant theme being if we don't wholly agree with whatever your position is then you will get personal abuse.

For essentially supporting a government and police force instead of some conspiracy theory and online opinions Bob calls me extreme, Sludge calls me a cnnt and AZ calls me an idiot. Cyril accepts people have polarized opinions and seems to think that settling these things with laws introduced by an the govt is not the solution. So what is?!

At what point do you guys realize how irrational you sound? You are behaving exactly the same way a lot of the MAGA, antivax, far-right trolls sound on the internet.

You may be right on Palestine Action. You may not. You may be right on Lucy Letby or any other legal issue too, but devolving this decision to a government aware of more of the facts of the case than any of us is absolutely NOT extreme. It's the norm.

It’s aeroplane

[JamesWales]

Something we can all agree on! 😌👍

[Wales-Bales]

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ain-government

We should all be thankful for people like Sludge & Rjk, who got millions of people to tactically vote for a leader who is willing to tackle these violent criminals head on in order to keep us all safe.

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Something we can all agree on! 😌👍

Quicksand

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

We should all be thankful for people like Sludge & Rjk, who got millions of people to tactically vote for a leader who is willing to tackle these violent criminals head on in order to keep us all safe.

Thank god we have a hopeless idiot in charge rather than a neo nazi hopeless idiot

[the other bob wilson]

Quick summary of the last few days here since I agreed(!!) with Delmbox's post, writing:

"Indeed, but they are a proscribed group so she chose to wear that t-shirt knowing she would be arrested and the costs and officer time that entailed"

For that position we get the following;

Sludge:
"Get your daft old racist on the case"

"execute all the protestors -JamesWales"

"You stupid fecking cnnt" (Subsequently deleted it seems)

Bob
"Being contrarian and being a prat"

"Your views are becoming ever more extreme"

AZ
"You have a slavish devotion to a pedantic and idiotic position"

"You're at the bottom of the Grand Canyon on this, Jimbo. Keep digging and you'll likely hit your homeland of Hades."

"you're an idiot"

Added to that we have Bob giving birth to some conspiracy (with no evidence) that the police and the govt are lying about the cost of airplane engine damage and we have a couple of the other usual suspects making insinuations here and there.

And why? Firstly for trusting devolving the implementation of the law to lawmakers (A Labour govt no less!) who were led by an MI5 report. Secondly for understanding that the police need to enforce laws without prejudice and thirdly for saying that people who openly break the law should expect to get nicked. All the while recognizing it's a contentious issue and stating a couple of times that protestors should not be aggressively dealt with nor harshly sentenced.

Barely more than a year ago a load of us got called idiots and fascists by the same kind of people above for NOT supporting a potential Labour Govt. Not we get called the same for having the temerity TO support the principle of enforcing the laws they've introduced. The constant theme being if we don't wholly agree with whatever your position is then you will get personal abuse.

For essentially supporting a government and police force instead of some conspiracy theory and online opinions Bob calls me extreme, Sludge calls me a cnnt and AZ calls me an idiot. Cyril accepts people have polarized opinions and seems to think that settling these things with laws introduced by an the govt is not the solution. So what is?!

At what point do you guys realize how irrational you sound? You are behaving exactly the same way a lot of the MAGA, antivax, far-right trolls sound on the internet.

You may be right on Palestine Action. You may not. You may be right on Lucy Letby or any other legal issue too, but devolving this decision to a government aware of more of the facts of the case than any of us is absolutely NOT extreme. It's the norm.

Who’s “we” ? It’s only you the contrarian who backs the arrest and possible imprisonment of blind, disabled people and octogenarians for the non violent wearing of a T shirt or displaying a placard on here so far

[jon1959]

It’s aeroplane

Quite right!

It is aeroplane not airplane.

It is criminal damage not terrorism.

It is obstruction not terrorism.

It is elderly Quakers holding a piece of cardboard not terrorism.

It is ex-Magistrates defying government over-reach not terrorism.

It is sons and daughters of Holocaust survivors standing up for the victims of genocide not terrorism.

It is civil disobedience not terrorism.

The proscription order - under pressure from the Trump government and Israel lobby groups - is authoritarian and dangerous and an attack on established civil liberties.

The government is criminalising opponents of genocide whilst enabling the perpetrators of genocide.

Not all police forces have acted the same way in the face of protestors defying the Palestine Action ban. Some have made mass arrests; some have turned a blind eye.

Everyone who joined the Parliament Square protest expected to be arrested. They showed a huge amount of courage and self sacrifice to ramp up the pressure on the government and expose their malign decision.

There will be a breaking point - maybe in the Courts; maybe when the prisons are full of ‘terrorist’ pensioners!

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Quite right!

It is aeroplane not airplane.

It is criminal damage not terrorism.

It is obstruction not terrorism.

It is elderly Quakers holding a piece of cardboard not terrorism.

It is ex-Magistrates defying government over-reach not terrorism.

It is sons and daughters of Holocaust survivors standing up for the victims of genocide not terrorism.

It is civil disobedience not terrorism.

The proscription order - under pressure from the Trump government and Israel lobby groups - is authoritarian and dangerous and an attack on established civil liberties.

The government is criminalising opponents of genocide whilst enabling the perpetrators of genocide.

Not all police forces have acted the same way in the face of protestors defying the Palestine Action ban. Some have made mass arrests; some have turned a blind eye.

Everyone who joined the Parliament Square protest expected to be arrested. They showed a huge amount of courage and self sacrifice to ramp up the pressure on the government and expose their malign decision.

There will be a breaking point - maybe in the Courts; maybe when the prisons are full of ‘terrorist’ pensioners!

They are criminals and they deserve to be in jail

James Whale

( currently paying off speeding fine number 37 )

[JamesWales]

Who’s “we” ? It’s only you the contrarian who backs the arrest and possible imprisonment of blind, disabled people and octogenarians for the non violent wearing of a T shirt or displaying a placard on here so far

Really, that is your response to what I wrote? Christ alive Bob. You accused me of having an extreme opinion! I also specifically said that I don't think they should be jailed, but I won't expect you to be accurate on this thread as you are making it as you go along now

[JamesWales]

Quick summary of the last few days here since I agreed(!!) with Delmbox's post, writing:

"Indeed, but they are a proscribed group so she chose to wear that t-shirt knowing she would be arrested and the costs and officer time that entailed"

For that position we get the following;

Sludge:
"Get your daft old racist on the case"

"execute all the protestors -JamesWales"

"You stupid fecking cnnt" (Subsequently deleted it seems)

Bob
"Being contrarian and being a prat"

"Your views are becoming ever more extreme"

AZ
"You have a slavish devotion to a pedantic and idiotic position"

"You're at the bottom of the Grand Canyon on this, Jimbo. Keep digging and you'll likely hit your homeland of Hades."

"you're an idiot"

Added to that we have Bob giving birth to some conspiracy (with no evidence) that the police and the govt are lying about the cost of airplane engine damage and we have a couple of the other usual suspects making insinuations here and there.

And why? Firstly for trusting devolving the implementation of the law to lawmakers (A Labour govt no less!) who were led by an MI5 report. Secondly for understanding that the police need to enforce laws without prejudice and thirdly for saying that people who openly break the law should expect to get nicked. All the while recognizing it's a contentious issue and stating a couple of times that protestors should not be aggressively dealt with nor harshly sentenced.

Barely more than a year ago a load of us got called idiots and fascists by the same kind of people above for NOT supporting a potential Labour Govt. Not we get called the same for having the temerity TO support the principle of enforcing the laws they've introduced. The constant theme being if we don't wholly agree with whatever your position is then you will get personal abuse.

For essentially supporting a government and police force instead of some conspiracy theory and online opinions Bob calls me extreme, Sludge calls me a cnnt and AZ calls me an idiot. Cyril accepts people have polarized opinions and seems to think that settling these things with laws introduced by an the govt is not the solution. So what is?!

At what point do you guys realize how irrational you sound? You are behaving exactly the same way a lot of the MAGA, antivax, far-right trolls sound on the internet.

You may be right on Palestine Action. You may not. You may be right on Lucy Letby or any other legal issue too, but devolving this decision to a government aware of more of the facts of the case than any of us is absolutely NOT extreme. It's the norm.

Will dip out of this thread now, as nothing to add other than the above, it's exhausting and everyone is going round in circles.

Enjoy agreeing with each other! 👍😘