Forum menu
Now Palestine Action is a proscribed organisation does that mean anyone wearing a keffiyeh, holding a "free, Palestine" sign or waving a Palestinian flag risk arrest and 6 months in jail?
Does expressing support/solidarity with the Palestinians equate to reasonable suspicion of support for Palestine Action?
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/13
I just do not know how it can be enforced. Presumably a court would have to make a judgement that they were a member? How do you prove someone is a member of a proscribed organisation?
its awfully close to thought crime for me.
Does expressing support/solidarity with the Palestinians equate to reasonable suspicion of support for Palestine Action?
Of course not.
How do you prove someone is a member of a proscribed organisation?
Usual communications network and attendance stuff, I'd imagine. Who's in regular contact with whom. Who's in meetings together. Etc.
Usual communications network and attendance stuff, I'd imagine. Who's in regular contact with whom. Who's in meetings together. Etc.
Since Palestine Action has been involved in criminal activity from the very beginning I doubt that information will be easily available.
I have a huge range of contacts locally in connection with Palestine and criminal damage has been done more than once to a local Barclays Bank, broken windows and red paint (I strongly disapprove) Photos of the aftermath have been posted on WhatsApp groups but no one I know has ever claimed to be in Palestine Action. And why would they?
When any of those things happen then I'll worry about it:
Proscription has got to go to Parliament (tomorrow, so get writing to your MP)
Worried yet ?
No.
It's got to go the Lords yet, but I think that proscription will happen because of the volume of their attacks as I intimated ^^. The severity of some attacks and violence against people went too far.
Then the legal process will begin and you can be de-proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000. The name of a group can be changed internally but that doesn't stop prosecution under proscription rules https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2023/09/15/factsheet-proscription/
The legal process will be interesting
The group has been charged now; Criminal Damage and National Security Act 2023 offences https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly1jejw4xeo
Worried yet ?
No.
It's got to go the Lords yet, but I think that proscription will happen because of the volume of their attacks as I intimated ^^. The severity of some attacks and violence against people went too far.
So basically you are no longer "worried" because you have changed your mind?
It will obviously sail through the Lords because it had the overwhelming support of the Commons.
Then the legal process will begin and you can be de-proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Dream on. The only way that an organisation which has been classed as terrorist is ever likely to be "de-proscribed" is if it forms or is part of a government somewhere.
And btw how do you think anyone can make the case for un-proscribing an organisation without expressing support for it? Just saying they should be legal is obviously expressing support for it.
One of the primary aims of proscribing an organisation is to silence any discussions concerning them.
Someone sent me this today
Spare a thought for the IDF today. They were out all day yesterday shooting innocent people trying to get bags of flour, and when they got home they had to find out the heartbreaking news that some people at Glastonbury don't like them. That cannot be good for your mental health.
So basically you are no longer "worried" because you have changed your mind?
I didn't say "no longer worried"
And btw how do you think anyone can make the case for un-proscribing an organisation without expressing support for it? Just saying they should be legal is obviously expressing support for it.
What a George W. Bush binary train of thought, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." (2001). I doubt that's what anyone had in mind.
Can you not just make a legal case and state the facts, like any witness in any case would?
Can you not just make a legal case and state the facts, like any witness in any case would?
So you think someone can give a television interview, for example, making the case that say Hamas, or any other terrorist organisation, should be seen as legitimate freedom fighters and not terrorists without the risk of being prosecuted for supporting a terrorist organisation?
I'm not convinced.
Can you not just make a legal case and state the facts, like any witness in any case would?
So you think someone can give a television interview, for example, making the case that say Hamas, or any other terrorist organisation, should be seen as legitimate freedom fighters and not terrorists without the risk of being prosecuted for supporting a terrorist organisation?
I'm not convinced.
We were talking about de-proscription as a process under s4 of the Terrorism Act 2000, I thought.
Why would that include a TV interview; it isn't Judge Rinder. At this point I'll bow out
The only way that an organisation which has been classed as terrorist is ever likely to be "de-proscribed" is if it forms or is part of a government somewhere
Well Hezbollah had/have a number of MPs (I think) but they are still deemed a terrorist organisation. I'm not really sure how that works even with the very flexible definitions that the UK works with.
Asking for a friend but if one was to voice support for Palestine, Action, do I they go to prison? Palestine & Action? Palestine_Action?
Time to remove Elbit systems from the UK?, I’d be up for that, quite how anyone can choose to work at a company knowing their handiwork is being used to commit a genocide that leaves them accountable is astounding
Asking for a friend but if one was to voice support for Palestine, Action, do I they go to prison? Palestine & Action? Palestine_Action?
I sent an email to Starmer stating my support for Palestine Action with screenshot of my donation, and there's hundreds if not thousands of others done the same so we'll see.
Why would that include a TV interview; it isn't Judge Rinder
Because if there is an attempt to legally challenge and "de-proscribe" Palestine Action I would expect it to be backed up by a public campaign, isn't that how democracy works?
This is a genuine question as there is a team of lawyers who are currently organising meetings in South London to make the case for removing Hamas from the list of proscribed organisations in the UK.
Their campaign is twofold, political and legal. Here is an example of one of their meetings which I didn't attend, their meeting in my local mosque which I was going to attend was cancelled at the last moment.
So how can they make the case for Hamas without falling foul of the Terrorism Act 2000?
Edit : Obviously as lawyers they are not going to be stupid enough to fall foul of the Terrorism Act 2000 but I don't understand how they get round it, eg, claiming that Hamas are freedom fighters not terrorists sounds very much like expressing support for them.
Nicely put :
Palestine Action has targeted property to challenge a war in which tens of thousands of civilians have been killed.
The group’s protests embarrass the government: the UK continues to supply equipment to Israel’s military as it slaughters Palestinians. Despite overwhelming evidence that war crime is piling on war crime in Gaza, and reportedly contrary to the advice of its own lawyers, the British government will not say that Israel has broken international law.
The government should be doing all it can to end this conflict, not to criminalise protests against it. But you do not need to sympathise with Palestine Action’s aims to believe that its proscription sets a chilling precedent and undermines democracy.
And as the Guardian editorial points out :
It is lamentable that MPs backed it. But cynically listing two white-supremacist organisations on the same order – Maniacs Murder Cult, whose members have claimed violent attacks globally, and Russian Imperial Movement, which seeks to create a new Russian imperial state – made it harder for legislators to vote it down.
Yeah I reckon that is how Yvette Cooper managed to get overwhelming support for her ban. She obviously didn't have the confidence that a stand alone ban would get the backing. It's still shameful mind, imo.
I don’t see how this group is embarrassing the UK government
This group are not doing anything that will help achieve their aims, many of which I support. All they are doing is playing into the lefties nutter narrative. Does anyone, for 1 second, believe that committing criminal damage is going to make any difference to the plight of the Palestinian people? Does anyone think their actions are going to help achieve a sensible resolution, let alone see those responsible for the atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank held to account?
All this group are doing is making it easier for the Idf to carry on by using them to label all those who want to see a just settlement as extremists.
I don’t see how this group is embarrassing the UK government
Well that depends on how shameless you consider the UK government to be. My personal opinion is not too far from yours in some respects:
1. The UK government is utterly shameless and will not be embarrassed at all by evidence that they are supporting a genocide
2. committing criminal damage will not help the Palestinians (see 1)
3. Their actions will not see a sensible resolution or justice for the perpetrators. Nor will any other actions that can be realistically contemplated, given the entrenched psychopathic nature of Israeli society, and the greed and stupidity of their patrons in Washington.
But. Maybe I'm wrong. It would be unforgivable to not TRY, just in case a miracle happens.
I don’t see how this group is embarrassing the UK government
Of course they are an embarrassment to this deeply unpopular government. They are a constant headline-grabbing reminder of how totally out of step with the opinion of voters this government is on this particular issue.
The poll, conducted by Opinium Research between 30 May and 2 June, found that 57 percent of people think the UK should impose a full arms embargo, with only 13 percent opposed.
Only 13% of voters support the government's current policy on arms sales to Israel !
Now whether causing criminal damage, as opposed to other tactics, is counterproductive is a different question. But there is no doubt that the government will be embarrassed by the constant reminder that they are helping to prop up a criminal far-right genocidal regime.
Which is why they have resorted to firstly attempting to silence Palestine Action, and secondly vilifying them by accusing them of being terrorists, a well-used tactic by authoritarian anti-democratic governments.
eg, claiming that Hamas are freedom fighters not terrorists sounds very much like expressing support for them.
Then maybe under international law, that the Palestinian people have the right of an armed resistance in face of an occupying force.
Hamas being that armed resistance.
I don’t see how this group is embarrassing the UK government
This group are not doing anything that will help achieve their aims, many of which I support. All they are doing is playing into the lefties nutter narrative. Does anyone, for 1 second, believe that committing criminal damage is going to make any difference to the plight of the Palestinian people? Does anyone think their actions are going to help achieve a sensible resolution, let alone see those responsible for the atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank held to account?
All this group are doing is making it easier for the Idf to carry on by using them to label all those who want to see a just settlement as extremists.
Here you go, perhaps this will help inform you
https://twitter.com/rivkahbrown/status/1940816076163686840?s=46&t=qvPR6lBfBXtAWZ-6beFWyA
But don’t worry, it’s all democratic
Palestine Action website is now down, **** this bunch of ****s running scared from Israeli lobbyists
Time to rattle of another very sweary email to starmer and co telling them what I think of their stance
It is perhaps time to start taking this shit seriously Somafunk. It might not impact on you personally but it might impact on those actively involved in opposing the genocide, especially if they risk getting arrested on a demo for whatever reason and there is an investigation into their social media activity.
We received this following WhatsApp message from an administrator of the Croydon Palestine Solidarity Campaign (she is herself Palestinian and a solicitor)
Dear members
Shamefully, the High Court today failed to pause the proscription of Palestine Action. That means that from 00:01 tonight Palestine Action will be proscribed as a terrorist group and it will be an offence under the Terrorism Act to be a member of or to show support for Palestine Action.
This includes supporting them verbally, sharing posts, wearing their logo etc....
Comrades at NetPol have produced some very useful guidance on the far reaching and draconian impact of proscription, as well as the potential consequences, including up to 14 years imprisonment, for falling foul of this unjust law:
https://netpol.org/2025/06/26/palestine-action -ban-guidance
If you are arrested under terrorism charges, please be aware that your rights will differ from those in a normal arrest. You could be held indefinitely without charge and treated as a terrorist. Individuals who have experienced this under the PREVENT strategy have reported being held in lit rooms in white paper jumpsuits for days.
Furthermore, an arrest can lead to significant long-term consequences, including:
Loss of access to bank accounts
Inability to obtain DBS clearance
Difficulty securing a mortgage or credit
Potential impacts on your partner
Restrictions on your freedom to travel, as many countries may deny you entry
It is vital that we all take these warnings seriously and protect ourselves and our community. Therefore, I ask you NOT to post anything about Palestine Action in this chat or any platform of PSC Croydon. Such posts will be deleted. To be clear we do not agree with the decision but we have a duty of care to our members some of whom are vulnerable.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation during this sensitive time.
Stay safe, everyone.
It is perhaps time to start taking this shit seriously Somafunk. It might not impact on you personally but it might impact on those actively involved in opposing the genocide, especially if they risk getting arrested on a demo for whatever reason and there is an investigation into their social media activity.
Yes, indeed. British 'democracy' took a very dark turn yesterday, and it has frightening implications for the notion of 'free speech' in our country, and possibly beyond. Sensing 'sweary emails' to Kier Starmer aren't likely to get past the automated filters, let alone further screening, and you won't register at all on the radar of security services, so basically you're wasting your own time doing so anyway. They might prosecute you under a breach of the Communications Act, just for lols, but very unlikely unless you persist. In short, it's not an activity that's going to get you anywhere. At worst, it could lead to your computer etc being seized, and that could have implications for others you communicate with, so think on.
Friends in the legal world are very, very concerned with the implications this decision has on many aspects of freedom of speech, and the freedom to protest etc. Our rights are being eroded very rapidly; we now have fewer rights in terms of FoS and protest, than we did just a few years ago.
Also, it's unhelpful to persist with the tired old clichés such as blaming the 'Israeli lobby', as that's both ignorant and fails to address the real issue which lies way beyond Israel. Screaming 'oh but Israel' all the time just detracts from all the shadowy machinations of agencies well beyond Israel. And it helps perpetuate the hatred that fuels support for war, and the flow of money that generates. And keeps us all divided. Look instead to the real roots of those attempts to divide us; the rise in fascism and ethno-nationalism in Europe and the US hasn't happened by accident, and has accelerated massively in just a couple of decades. We've now moved from 'never again', to 'when'. Israel-Palestine is a distraction; Billions of dollars are being pumped in to making sure that whilst our focus is concentrated on that, we're not seeing what else is happening. One aspect of this is that it's now clear to see that our politicians really aren't in control; they're being manipulated and told what to do by external forces bent on undermining our societies. This is very disturbing, yet we can still do something about it. The talk of a new left-wing party forming is encouraging, signs of roots of resistance, but obviously far too small yet to have any impact. The option of direct action is always available to those who wish to take such risks, but such action needn't take place under any particular banner. I expect many small organisations will spring up in place of Palestine Action, and it will be a game of whack-a-mole for the government and security services to try to chase them all. Keep them busy, spread their resources so thin they snap. Remember that we are many, they are few. And divided, we are weak. Seek what unites, not divides us. In the last couple of days, I've come under attack on here, from people I would probably otherwise be allied with, simply because I have a different perspective. Don't let your own narrative become your prison. Listen to others, learn, grow stronger together.
I don’t see how this group is embarrassing the UK government
This group are not doing anything that will help achieve their aims, many of which I support. All they are doing is playing into the lefties nutter narrative. Does anyone, for 1 second, believe that committing criminal damage is going to make any difference to the plight of the Palestinian people? Does anyone think their actions are going to help achieve a sensible resolution, let alone see those responsible for the atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank held to account?
All this group are doing is making it easier for the Idf to carry on by using them to label all those who want to see a just settlement as extremists.
Here you go, perhaps this will help inform you
https://twitter.com/rivkahbrown/status/1940816076163686840?s=46&t=qvPR6lBfBXtAWZ-6beFWyA
The evidence in Gaza and the West Bank suggest that they have had no meaningful affect at all.
I still don’t understand why so many here think that committing criminal act repeatedly is ok because in this instance you happen to support their views.
I still don’t understand why so many here think that committing criminal act repeatedly is ok because in this instance you happen to support their views.
I don't understand what you don't understand :-). What I don't understand is how you can support someone's views but be so against them doing anything to further their (and your) aims?
I still don’t understand why so many here think that committing criminal act repeatedly is ok because in this instance you happen to support their views.
I think that if someone believes that committing a 'criminal act' to try to help prevent further genocide is justifiable, then that is commendable. Don't you?
I still don’t understand why so many here think that committing criminal act repeatedly is ok
Do they though? I know that Somafunk does but is it really a case of "so many" think it's ok?
Personally I strongly oppose Palestine Action's tactics (for a variety of reasons although under different circumstances I might) But I utterly oppose the false claim that they are "terrorists" which I consider to be deeply sinister and dangerous.
Yes I know that Labour politicians have decided to redefine what terrorism means but I find that deeply sinister and dangerous.
And not least because these same politicians will not classify bombing children, starving them, shooting them in the head, and burning them alive, as terrorism.
I don't need morally bankrupt politicians such as Yvette Cooper and Sir Keir Starmer to lecture me on what constitutes terrorism.
Personally I strongly oppose Palestine Action's tactics (for a variety of reasons although under different circumstances I might)
You've said that a few times but AFAIK you've not said what those "reasons" are (maybe I just didn't read that post). Is it because you think "breaking the law" is inherently "bad", or because you think doing so is counterproductive to the achieving the desired objective?
Yes I know that Labour politicians have decided to redefine what terrorism means
They haven't, they have decided to (rigidly) apply the definition as laid down by law from 2000. Not a good thing, either way but important I think because it tied the courts hands yesterday to support the appeals that what PA did 'isn't terrorism'
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/1
I still don’t understand why so many here think that committing criminal act repeatedly is ok because in this instance you happen to support their views.
I'm not sure many are saying criminal acts are ok. We're saying they should be treated as criminal acts rather than terrorist acts.
Whilst pointing out that many rights and freedoms we enjoy now were won by people committing criminal acts
They haven't, they have decided to (rigidly) apply the definition as laid down by law from 2000. Not a good thing, either way but important I think because it tied the courts hands yesterday to support the appeals that what PA did 'isn't terrorism'
That's the beauty of drafting laws that are so broad that they can be interpreted any way you want - they give the freedom to politicians to prohibit anything they like.
I just had a look at the list of proscribed organisations. I thought at first I'd clicked on one of binners' memes by mistake
Yes I know that Labour politicians have decided to redefine what terrorism means
They haven't, they have decided to (rigidly) apply the definition as laid down by law from 2000.
I am not sure if you realise it but you have simply reiterated the point I made. It was Labour politicians in 2000 who laid down the definition of what constitutes terrorism.
I don't need Labour politicians to tell me that spraying red paint is terrorism but destroying hospitals and murdering children isn't.
When a Labour Home Secretary adds the IDF to the list of proscribed terrorist organisations I might start taking their opinions of what constitutes terrorism a tad more seriously.
Personally I strongly oppose Palestine Action's tactics (for a variety of reasons although under different circumstances I might)
You've said that a few times but AFAIK you've not said what those "reasons" are (maybe I just didn't read that post). Is it because you think "breaking the law" is inherently "bad", or because you think doing so is counterproductive to the achieving the desired objective?
Yes I did give reasons but that is no longer important because Yvette Cooper has decided that I cannot support them anyway, whether I want to or not.
I cannot believe just how low a Labour government has stooped. It has joined Nigel Farage in the gutter. And now heading for the sewer.
That's the beauty of drafting laws that are so broad that they can be interpreted any way you want - they give the freedom to politicians to prohibit anything they like.
Yes, I've said previously I think it is bad law, but it does make what PA did technically terrorism, and therefore the courts hands are tied to be able to say it isn't. And while this Gov is rightly taking the blame for the interpretations / decisions to call PA terrorists against what 'most people' consider a true definition, they didn't write the law.
It was Labour politicians in 2000 who laid down the definition of what constitutes terrorism.
Yes, true, but if you were referring to the parliamentary process from quarter of a century ago that created that act why would you phrase it in the present tense 'Labour politicians have decided to redefine what terrorism means'. As above, interpretation is on them but not the definition.
Or maybe we can play it the other way....can i congratulate Kier and chums for creating the NHS, brilliant work 😉
As above, interpretation is on them but not the definition.
So previous Labour politicians redefined the term "terrorism" to suit their own agenda and current Labour politicians have decided to interpret it in their own way but that's okay because they were/are both wrong??
I don't get the point you are trying to make. You seem to be saying it's a shit law introduce by Labour politicians but don't blame current Labour politicians for exploiting it .....is that correct?
but it does make what PA did technically terrorism, and therefore the courts hands are tied to be able to say it isn't.
Well we already have the first test cases
https://novaramedia.com/2025/07/05/protesters-arrested-for-holding-i-support-palestine-action-signs/
If you look at the clip in the link you will see a very elderly and frail old woman being led away by a copper, she is very clearly a terrorist!
So God bless Yvette Cooper thanks to her we can all sleep safely in our beds tonight! 🤨🥹
The country has been slipping into authoritarianism for a long time. If you're going to oppose the official narrative you need to tread very carefully, give the state even the slightest excuse and they'll use every weapon at their disposal to crush you. When we live in a time where people get arrested for speech, messing with military aircraft will bring the state down on you like a ton of bricks. This was a very foolish move by PA.
Sadly if a member of the "far right" had pulled a stunt like this I have no doubt that many in this thread would be cheering the government on.
I don't get the point you are trying to make. You seem to be saying it's a shit law introduce by Labour politicians but don't blame current Labour politicians for exploiting it .....is that correct?
No, it isn't. Let me make it as clear as I can
1. The current Gov didn't push the act through which created the 2000 law, which defines Terrorism in the terms I've linked above, so for you to say that "Labour politicians have decided to redefine" (present tense) isn't correct.
2. They HAVE decided to interpret the 2000 definition strictly, which I have said several times is IMHO not right, most recently "not a good thing" and for avoidance of doubt I am particularly against the bit that says that (paraphrase) "serious damage to property....in attempt to influence the government" constitutes terrorism. But I can't ignore that it does.
3. It is their choice on who / what orgs they take to parliament to approve proscription and on this I am also against, also that they did a job lot including two other orgs to complicate the decision
4. In spite of my opinions expressed in 2 and 3 - the 2000 act is clear in definition and so once the Gov by proper action in parliament proscribes PA as a rerrorist organisation, it makes it virtually impossible for a court to say it isn't. So any criticism of the judiciary has to be careful, they don't set law, they apply it, and on occasion interpret. IANAL but the only bit that seems vaguely open to interpretation against the 2000 law as written is whether paint in jet engines (section 2b) constitutes "serious damage to property"
Thanks jonv yeah I know that you think the decision to proscribe Palestine Action is wrong, you have said so on several occasions now!
I still don't understand why you keep pointing out that what the government has done with regards to PA is legal. I am not aware of a single person who has question the legality of the issue.
I am only aware of people who, like you, think that the decision is wrong.
Sadly if a member of the "far right" had pulled a stunt like this I have no doubt that many in this thread would be cheering the government on.
Well if a member of the far-right pulled a stunt like that I think it would surprise a lot of people, the far-right are not generally associated with peaceful demonstrations against genocides.
And if people on this thread did indeed cheer the government for using anti-terrorist legislation against peaceful far-right protestors it would definitely be shortsighted imo.
I don't oppose the classification of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation because I agree with them [Yvette Cooper please note] but because they are clearly not terrorists, whatever some daft law might say.
The problem with far-right protestors however is that they are not historically noted for the peaceful nature of their protests. In fact for almost a hundred years far-right protests and demonstrations have been strongly linked with violence and terrorising entire communities.
From the violent far-right marches in Jewish areas of London in the 1930s to the far-right attacks on hotels housing asylum seekers less than a year ago.
So there's that.
So God bless Yvette Cooper thanks to her we can all sleep safely in our beds tonight! 🤨🥹
And under the heading of "Anything Yvette Cooper can do, I can do something stupider (or die trying)" Lisa Nandy has been calling for the BBC to sack people over the Gaza documentary. Not the one that they were too biased and cowardly to broadcast, but the one they did broadcast and make available very briefly on iPlayer, which was narrated by a child who was the son of an agricultural scientist hired by Hamas to help feed the Palestinians.