Right to protest...

[JohnD]

... it's no longer about Israel/Palestine.

Criticism of Israel's racist genocide in Palestine is very much about Israel and Palestine.

Obviously, supporters of racist genocide don't like it to be criticised.

 

[fillyboy]

I haven't seen one of those.

But obviously, people should be permitted to oppose racist genocide, such as Israel's actions in Palestine.

By breaking into military bases and damaging aircraft?

 

[JohnD]

"obviously, people should be permitted to oppose racist genocide, such as Israel's actions in Palestine"

 

[fillyboy]

"obviously, people should be permitted to oppose racist genocide, such as Israel's actions in Palestine"

By breaking into air bases and damaging aircraft?, do you support a proscribed group John?

 

[JohnD]

Do you support racist genocide, filly?

 

[fillyboy]

Do you support racist genocide, filly?

Never have done.

 

[fillyboy]

By breaking into air bases and damaging aircraft?, do you support a proscribed group John?

 

[JohnD]

So you don't support the actions of Israel in Palestine.

 

[JohnD]

...I'm in favour of peaceful demonstration, but there has to be a red line. Do you seriously think attacking an air force base and damaging aircraft doesn't cross that red line...

Filly keeps pretending that criticism of racist genocide is the same as breaking into an air force base.

 

[Odds]

Giving the police a mandate to decide on whether or not a protest has the right to go ahead is another short step to an increasingly authoritarian state.

 

[fillyboy]

Giving the police a mandate to decide on whether or not a protest has the right to go ahead is another short step to an increasingly authoritarian state.

Have they been given that mandate?

 

[Si_]

If the 'right wing' used their protests to actively support a proscribed terrorist group, they'd be shut down immediately and all future marches banned. Yet now we have thousands of inadequates with banners supporting some of the world's worst terrorists who whine about their rights being infringed. Protest itself should not be banned, but perhaps if these degenerates were imprisoned for 14 years minimum instead of being taken back to the police station then allowed straight home, more people would think twice before advocating for terrorists.

And before the apologists whine, "Oh, they're just protesting against genocide," I might remind them that not a single person has ever been arrested for carrying a placard saying, "I protest against genocide."

 

[carmanmemoranda]

If the 'right wing' used their protests to actively support a proscribed terrorist group, they'd be shut down immediately and all future marches banned. Yet now we have thousands of inadequates with banners supporting some of the world's worst terrorists who whine about their rights being infringed. Protest itself should not be banned, but perhaps if these degenerates were imprisoned for 14 years minimum instead of being taken back to the police station then allowed straight home, more people would think twice before advocating for terrorists.

And before the apologists whine, "Oh, they're just protesting against genocide," I might remind them that not a single person has ever been arrested for carrying a placard saying, "I protest against genocide."

Falsely trying to suggest that protest in support of Palestine is automatically support of hamas.

They are different things.

People can protest about both sides in this war, surely

 

[Brigadier]

...but

?

HWM is as stable as a brolly in a hurricane.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

This bit from your quote:

Police forces will be granted powers to put conditions on repeat protests, the government has announced, a day after nearly 500 protesters were arrested. Senior officers will be able to consider the "cumulative impact" of previous protests, the Home Office said, which could mean they instruct organisers to hold events elsewhere if a site has seen repeated demonstrations.

I wonder if the number of previous protests at the same location will be set out in the detail (e.g. if five or more, the senior officer can act) or will it be entirely at senior officers discretion. I also wonder if timescales will come into it (e.g. the same march can't use the same location more than three times within a 12 month period).

I 100% agree with our right to protest and we shouldn't take these rights lightly, especially if they're being eroded. However, if a group marches along the same streets numerous times within a relatively short timescale, I can see some logic in the changes depending on the detail / criteria.