One of my favorite signs I saw in DC last month read "I don't condemn Hamas but I do condemn your mom"
Really the perfect response to that bullshit
headline worded in a way that suggests they committed terrorism in a separate incident and were linked back to the rally and didn't just get arrested for having paraglider imagery, which is what actually happened
I saw that offense used the British spelling and immediately knew it was the case that they were charged with terrorism for having the images on them
I read it twice and I can't find it anywhere - what law are they supposed to have broken?
Terf Island doesn't have a consistution so basically whatever they want
Terf Island doesn't have a consistution
wait what? am i falling for a dumb bit here or is there actually a country in the 21st century that still doesn't have a real constitution?
they pretend there's a constitution but it exists entirely in the minds of judges and shit. it's supposed to be this cloud of principles and important laws and precedents or some shit.
in practice it's numberwang, i think.
but it exists entirely in the minds of judges
If by this you mean caselaw, sure.
The UK does have a constitution, but it's spread across several dozen documents, caselaw and convention. Government action has in the past been struck down for being unconstitutional, which would be fairly impressive for a nation without one.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/13/three-guilty-of-terror-offence-over-paraglider-images-at-uk-palestine-march
The three protesters were charged under the Terrorism Act with carrying or displaying an article to arouse reasonable suspicion that they are supporters of a banned organisation, Hamas, which they denied.
so they were charged with doing something that in their view could reasonably be supporting a banned organisation, which is meaningfully different to actually supporting the organisation which the judge said there was no evidence for? I don't really get it still
Under the Terrorism Act 2000:
-Inviting support for a proscribed organisation. -expressing an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation,
and
-wearing clothing or carrying or displaying articles in public in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter of the proscribed organisation.
The scumbag of a prosecutor made this remark:
The fact that these images were being displayed in the context of a protest opposing the Israeli response to the Hamas attacks demonstrates a glorification of the actions taken by the group.
What this fascist errand-boy calls a "response" is a full-blown genocide. Yet I still have the feeling that the British regime wouldn't hurt you the least if you were to display the zionist flag or similar hate symbols glorifying the massacring of thousands.
the WOKE STATE department is trying to BAN PARAGLIDERS!!!!!!!!!
“I do not find you were seeking to show any support for Hamas.”
I hate how living in a deeply unserious country can lead to such serious consequences for the relatively sane.
Remember: The west is free*
*
Because all opposition has been so efficiently curtailed, destroyed and removed that it is no longer possible to even imagine struggling against the state. As such noone ever experiences the brutal fist, and when one witnesses it, one assumes it is deserved.
If there's literally anything I like about the US, it's that judges can't ding you for shit like this.
Sure, they'll kill you if you get too bad but at least your symbolic protests are protected.
You do not, under any circumstances, have to hand it to them though.
You do something like this in the US and you're at risk of getting killed by the feds, the far right (infiltrated and motivated by feds), or local police and framed for a serious crime.
Lol they can and do. It just depends on where you’re being tried and how good your lawyer is
free speech absolutism also means actual nazis and fascists can say and do whatever they'd like. at least in the UK there's a line you can cross with racial incitement and other heinous shit, here you can wave a nazi flag over the interstate and shout "x group deserves to die" and that's constitutionally protected
While it does prevent some open fascistic rhetoric, it also prevents expressing disapproval of ongoing genocides depending on the UK governments position towards them.
It's a double edged sword for sure, just feels like the sword's exclusively targeting leftists here. You still see hundreds of thousands of British people on the streets calling for an end to genocide, but if any implication you support the organization most actively resisting genocide gets you fined or charged that's pretty fucked
The court has been found to be fascist and aiding and abetting a genocide.
