Seems a bit much to label them as terrorist but they’ve done a lot of vandalism on various companies. Seems their MO is to find a target rationalize how it’s somehow tangentially associated with Israel and then break some shit.
They crossed a line when they did this to a military base and vandalized some RAF planes. They had some weirdo rationalization for this, but forgot to rationalize how this kind of thing will help anyone in Gaza. They seem to be just breaking things to get attention for themselves.
They crossed a line when they did this to a military base…
They didn’t cross the line into terrorism, though. Yes, they are criminals, no, they are not terrorists. It’s an incredibly important distinction. By definition, they are not terrorists:
criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages…
The UK parliament is sovereign, not the UN. So how the UN defines things isn’t relevant.
Also the law is meant to prevent terrorism. While I don’t agree with the designation in this case, I can understand the concern around how this group is escalating their attacks. There’s this “globalize the intifada” stochastic terrorism going around and the Iranian regime (the ultimate source of most of this shit) just got it’s ass handed to them and may be looking to do something to show their people they’re still “strong”.
Maybe neither should be banned? Also I’m not “supporting genocide”, I just look at the casualty numbers and they’re consistent with a war, not a genocide. The word “genocide” has been weaponized and that’s rationalizing the use of violence which doesn’t help anyone.
These “Palestine Action” idiots are not helping Palestinians in any way. They’re narcissists doing vandalism to increase their standing within a internet small bubble. That’s all they’re doing.
You’re reading words I’ve written, that’s speech but apparently some people around here think that should be banned. Do you think words should be banned and vandalism by narcissists should be legal?
It was just interesting, that in a post about people’s speech being banned with legal consequences (14 years in prison) your first comment wasn’t to protest that. But in a comment threatening speech with social consequences (a ban from a social media site) you were right in on protesting that.
Once again, violence is already happening. All we can do now is quibble about who that violence is directed at.
Would you prefer violence against Palestinian civilians, or some property?
Summary:
Speech is already being banned. Do you think supporting/ denying the genocide should be banned? Or acknowledging/protesting the genocide should be banned?
Violence is already happening. Do you support the violence against Palestinian civilians. Or the violence against some planes.
To answer your question, given the choice between a world with more vandalism or a world with more genocide: I’d take the world with more vandalism.
Doing these kinds of stunts based on weird tangential connections does not gain any support for a cause. In fact it just turns people against it. This kind of thing is done purely to improve these people’s standing within the cause, but doesn’t further the cause itself. It’s just narcissistic attention seeking behaviour.
Seems a bit much to label them as terrorist but they’ve done a lot of vandalism on various companies. Seems their MO is to find a target rationalize how it’s somehow tangentially associated with Israel and then break some shit.
They crossed a line when they did this to a military base and vandalized some RAF planes. They had some weirdo rationalization for this, but forgot to rationalize how this kind of thing will help anyone in Gaza. They seem to be just breaking things to get attention for themselves.
They didn’t cross the line into terrorism, though. Yes, they are criminals, no, they are not terrorists. It’s an incredibly important distinction. By definition, they are not terrorists:
-definition of terrorism, UN resolution 1566
The UK parliament is sovereign, not the UN. So how the UN defines things isn’t relevant.
Also the law is meant to prevent terrorism. While I don’t agree with the designation in this case, I can understand the concern around how this group is escalating their attacks. There’s this “globalize the intifada” stochastic terrorism going around and the Iranian regime (the ultimate source of most of this shit) just got it’s ass handed to them and may be looking to do something to show their people they’re still “strong”.
Why are you still allowed to talk? You’re a genocide apologist
So you think that some speech should be banned?
Ironic statement given the post. Speech has been banned, all that’s left to do is quibble about what speech.
Should speech supporting genocide be banned, or should speech protesting genocide be banned?
Maybe neither should be banned? Also I’m not “supporting genocide”, I just look at the casualty numbers and they’re consistent with a war, not a genocide. The word “genocide” has been weaponized and that’s rationalizing the use of violence which doesn’t help anyone.
These “Palestine Action” idiots are not helping Palestinians in any way. They’re narcissists doing vandalism to increase their standing within a internet small bubble. That’s all they’re doing.
You’re reading words I’ve written, that’s speech but apparently some people around here think that should be banned. Do you think words should be banned and vandalism by narcissists should be legal?
It was just interesting, that in a post about people’s speech being banned with legal consequences (14 years in prison) your first comment wasn’t to protest that. But in a comment threatening speech with social consequences (a ban from a social media site) you were right in on protesting that.
Once again, violence is already happening. All we can do now is quibble about who that violence is directed at.
Would you prefer violence against Palestinian civilians, or some property?
Summary:
Speech is already being banned. Do you think supporting/ denying the genocide should be banned? Or acknowledging/protesting the genocide should be banned?
Violence is already happening. Do you support the violence against Palestinian civilians. Or the violence against some planes.
To answer your question, given the choice between a world with more vandalism or a world with more genocide: I’d take the world with more vandalism.
You don’t see the connection with the air force? The military? Are you dense? Tell me you at least understand why they did Elbit and Thales…
The RAF isn’t part of the IDF last I checked.
Doing these kinds of stunts based on weird tangential connections does not gain any support for a cause. In fact it just turns people against it. This kind of thing is done purely to improve these people’s standing within the cause, but doesn’t further the cause itself. It’s just narcissistic attention seeking behaviour.