High Court Rules...

[morqthana]

Who are we at war with?

We aren't.

But let's deal with those scenarios first, then we can move on to others which are not war-related.

Or, you can just accept that sooner or later you are going to have to admit that

"NOTHING can justify attacking military assets or people and businesses operating lawfully" is wrong, and that sometimes it is justified, and therefore the debate is about where to draw the line, not whether it exists or not.

 

[motorbiking]

We aren't.

Exactly.

 

[ellal]

I see mb and filly are still trying to work out how to talk their way out of that wet paper bag they cohabit...

How many more pages will it take for them to realise that according to a UK court no crimes were committed

 

[motorbiking]

I see mb and filly are still trying to work out how to talk their way out of that wet paper bag they cohabit...

How many more pages will it take for them to realise that according to a UK court no crimes were committed

You’ll. be able to post a judgement stating that.

Decision: Ground 2
12. The HRA does not protect violent or non peaceful protest. [108] The court rejects the claimant’s submission that Palestine Action’s objective was to undertake acts of civil disobedience. The means and methods that Palestine Action advocates are inconsistent with the hallmarks of civil disobedience The court concludes that Palestine Action is an organisation that promotes its political cause through criminality and the encouragement of criminality. [21] to [30]

Criminals

 

[Dec27]

Another Jew bashing thread from odds. Who’d have thunk it

 

[Odds]

Another Jew bashing thread from odds. Who’d have thunk it

Another anonymous comment from an anonymous troll with nothing to say.

 

[Highway Man]

Another anonymous comment from an anonymous troll with nothing to say.

Attack the post not the man.
Reported

 

[Odds]

Attack the post not the man.
Reported

lol - you're bias is showing.

 

[noseall]

Attack the post not the man.
Reported

You’ve quoted odds by mistake. Silly billy.

 

[Highway Man]

You’ve quoted odds by mistake. Silly billy.

No mistake made.

 

[ellal]

You’ll. be able to post a judgement stating that.

Decision: Ground 2
12. The HRA does not protect violent or non peaceful protest. [108] The court rejects the claimant’s submission that Palestine Action’s objective was to undertake acts of civil disobedience. The means and methods that Palestine Action advocates are inconsistent with the hallmarks of civil disobedience The court concludes that Palestine Action is an organisation that promotes its political cause through criminality and the encouragement of criminality. [21] to [30]

Criminals

You just don't get it do you...

Did the court convict them of any criminal offence?

The answer is no!

So regardless of anything you come up with or what you believe, they are therefore not convicted criminals

 

[motorbiking]

according to a UK court no crimes were committed

“The court concludes that Palestine Action is an organisation that promotes its political cause through criminality and the encouragement of criminality”

It’s not me who doesn’t get it.

 

[noseall]

“The court concludes that Palestine Action is an organisation

...and not an individual.

 

[motorbiking]

...and not an individual.

Nobody was on trial

 

[ellal]

“The court concludes that Palestine Action is an organisation that promotes its political cause through criminality and the encouragement of criminality”

It’s not me who doesn’t get it.

But the six Palestine Action people who were acquitted were not criminals!

It appears you are confusing the issue