UK Politics
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
view the rest of the comments
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".
Since the UK signed the UN charter in 1945, it might behoove us to conform to their definitions unless, of course the UK parliament has agreed on a different definition for terrorism?
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.
Nonsense. "This kind of thing" won women the vote and got us a weekend.
Those movements succeeded because they were lead by people that has clear goals and were able to make plans. They weren't random people just doing random acts of vandalism to get monetization from tech bro billionaires.
Palestine Action has clear goals though.
Why are you still allowed to talk? You're a genocide apologist
So you think that some speech should be banned?
Some kind of people. Genocide denialists for example. Banned from humanity.
What do you mean by this? Is that a death threat?
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?
Also they threw paint at planes, idiot. If a bit of red paint can damage fighter jets maybe build them better. Fucking liar.
You have consistantly spread genocide denialism since you created your account.
You should get banned
So you agree with censorship. You just disagree on which people should be censored.
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.
I want the war to end. The only way the war ends is if Hamas releasing the hostages. If your protests were denouncing Hamas and calling upon them to release the hostages, then I might believe you care about Palestinians.
But you don't really care about them. You're just using Palestinian civilians the same way Hamas does: sacrificing them to justify the existence of a violent group.
There is a significant movement of Gazans protesting against Hamas rule. You admire these Palestine Action idiots, I admire Palestinians protesting against the oppressive Hamas government... in the middle of a war. Palestinians in Gaza struggle with forming and kind of opposition to Hamas because Hamas will torture people to death for speaking out against them.
I look at the photo in article and I see a bunch of white kids cosplaying as Palestinians at a protest in a western country. Cultural appropriation of the suffering of people in a place they've never been to. Suffering they have no understanding of. You've probably never even heard of Palestinians being tortured by Hamas for speaking out or the Hamas attack on food distribution that happened just yesterday because you're in an internet bubble that bans anything that doesn't conform to a narrative.
I respect actual Palestinians living in Gaza that protest against authoritarians. You respect some white kids living in an internet bubble that cosplay as Palestinians and vandalize shit. But go on believing you have some internet fabricated moral high ground just because you can spell the word "genocide".
Perhaps you responded to the wrong person. Here's what my comment stated and asked:
Speech is being banned. Would you prefer speech supporting/denying genocide be banned? Or, speech protesting genocide be banned.
Violence is already happening. Would you prefer violence be used to support genocide. Or, violence be used against planes in protest of genocide?
Personally, I would prefer vandalism over genocide. Not a particularly tricky moral dilemma for me, weird question to have asked.
Noteably, nothing about Hamas. You saw that right? Tilt at some other windmills. Secondly no-one seriously believes, or should believe the IDF would stop the genocide but for a few hostages, you should be ashamed of yourself.