this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2025
199 points (99.0% liked)

World News

48473 readers
1529 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/15885857

In the encounter, which she filmed, one officer told her: “Mentioning freedom of Gaza, Israel, genocide, all of that all come under proscribed groups, which are terror groups that have been dictated by the government.”

He went on to say that the phrase “Free Gaza” was “supportive of Palestine Action”, adding it was an offence “to express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, namely Palestine Action is an offence under section 12(1A) of the Terrorism Act”. The officer told her she had committed that offence.

...

The ban on Palestine Action, the first against a direct action protest group, came into force on 5 July after a high court judge refused to grant the group’s co-founder Huda Ammori an injunction suspending it while legal action was pending.

One of the police officers told Murton they were “trying to be fair”, adding: “We could have jumped out, arrested you, dragged you off in a van.”

all 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Iceblade02@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

This is what inevitably happens when freedom of thought, speech and expression is limited for essentially any reason. Once the tools are in place, they will be used, abused and inevitably end up in the hands of someone you disagree with.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

The takeover of our government by Israel approaches completion.

[–] Lyra_Lycan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 41 points 1 day ago

Fuck this country. Fuck the government. Fuck Israel. Fuck everyone who stands for cruelty. Justice for Palestine. Free Palestine. Fuck the false leaders.

[–] genevieve@sh.itjust.works 42 points 1 day ago

Dystopian. Free Palestine! 🇵🇸

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You can't always tell when an article isn't about an incident in the USA, unless they feel the need to specify that the police were armed.

[–] LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Another good indicator is that the police in the US don't actually know what the law is most of the time.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

IIRC there was a precedent that police aren't expected to know the law, as long as they act "in good faith" under their best understanding of the law. This resulted in an almost immediate end to all attempts to provide legal training to police, because ignorance of the law is actually a defense, but only for cops.

[–] LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 6 points 1 day ago

I think you're right though it varies by locale. I live in Minnesota and here police officers are required to have a college education and part of that is learning and being tested on both the criminal and traffic code. You're not expected to have it all memorized but you are supposed to have reviewed it and understood it.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

and wouldnt care if they did know.

[–] Soapbox@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"proscribed organisation" was a giveaway for me. It just sounded like a British legal term that nobody would use here in the US.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

I doubt many Americans could define "proscribed: without googling it. Obviate, circumscribe, auspice vs auspices, expatriate .. few people in the US knows what those mean either. 'Effect' vs 'affect' is barely understood.

[–] GlassHalfHopeful@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago