Sick Boy
Super Moderator
No one on here has ever expressed sympathy for the Iranian regime or Hezbollah.
No one on here has ever expressed sympathy for the Iranian regime or Hezbollah.I'm not sure why it's so hard for people to call out the bullshit that is going on in the world without constantly taking sides and drawing trenches all the time for some pretty detestable regimes. I don't see any good guys here.
Israel are like that drunk guy at the bar just windmiing everyone they can because they've got small man syndrome, and it's abhorrent. Not to say the October attacks themselves weren't awful however, and Hamas are also a bunch of cunts as well.
Iran is a country that is run by scumbags, and anyone feeling sympathy towards that regime, or Hezbollah for that matter, needs to have a word with themselves.
Additionally, Trump getting involved is a total joke too, and he's a moron for doing so. Think whatever you want of his supporters, but I doubt many wanted this.
Final thought: Some on here need to get educated with Biden's deals with Iran. Some of you are going on as if they were remotely respectable, probably cause he isn't Trump, but what he did there was embarrasing as well.
Get me to Ocean Beach.
No one on here has ever expressed sympathy for the Iranian regime or Hezbollah.
Perfectly sums up Starmer really. Back when the same thing happening in 2003 protesting Iraq he defended the protesters.Palestine action is to be proscribed as a terrorist organisation. That will make things interesting
It’s an interesting escalation isn’t it?Perfectly sums up Starmer really. Back when the same thing happening in 2003 protesting Iraq he defended the protesters.
Now he's spending his time banning protest groups and complaining about the Glastonbury line up while letting Israel commit genocide while we supply them with arms and training
He has zero principles.It’s an interesting escalation isn’t it?
So I’m sure that’s not trueHe has zero principles.
Perfectly sums up Starmer really. Back when the same thing happening in 2003 protesting Iraq he defended the protesters.
Now he's spending his time banning protest groups and complaining about the Glastonbury line up while letting Israel commit genocide while we supply them with arms and training.
Was he defending the right to protest in 2003 or was he defending unlawful actions by protestors in 2003? Obviously there's a big difference.
I suspect it was the former, but I don't know.
If it was, then it's very different to this situation and you can't really compare.
The Fairford Five was a group of five British peace protesters (Paul Milling, Margaret Jones, Phil Pritchard, Toby Olditch and Josh Richards) who broke into the RAF Fairford military air base in 2003 and disabled equipment in order to disrupt military operations at the start of the Iraq War. The group was given its name by supporters and by articles in the press reporting on the event and the judicial trials which followed. Two members of the group had previously been members of Trident Ploughshares. The case which followed resulted in the first occurrence of a High Court Judge being called upon to pronounce on the legality of a war.
What Israel are doing in Gaza and the West Bank qualifies as terrorism but our wet lettuce of a PM supports them.@chiefdave wont let me quote/reply for some reason so tagging you instead.
Sorry my fault, when you said 'defended' I didn't realise you meant in a legal capacity, I thought you meant in a more general sense he supported the protests.
I guess that's a little different - e.g. if a QC defends a murderer it doesn't mean he supports murder!
I'm not sure these actions fit the terrorism description though, it's open to debate, so this does seem heavy handed I agree.
I think it's a slippery slope and if you start restricting what protests are deemed acceptable what is allowed will become so restricted as to barely be noticeable.I'm not sure these actions fit the terrorism description though, it's open to debate, so this does seem heavy handed I agree.
What Israel are doing in Gaza and the West Bank qualifies as terrorism but our wet lettuce of a PM supports them.
There's occasions where protest needs to be disruptive
The actions of the Fairford Five were not considered terrorism at the time, the legal definition of terrorism is the same as it was then.@chiefdave wont let me quote/reply for some reason so tagging you instead.
Sorry my fault, when you said 'defended' I didn't realise you meant in a legal capacity, I thought you meant in a more general sense he supported the protests.
I guess that's a little different - e.g. if a QC defends a murderer it doesn't mean he supports murder!
I'm not sure these actions fit the terrorism description though, it's open to debate, so this does seem heavy handed I agree.
It's exactly on message of what's allowed, only when we speak in Yiddish will it be acceptable on the farm!I think it's a slippery slope and if you start restricting what protests are deemed acceptable what is allowed will become so restricted as to barely be noticeable.
There's occasions where protest needs to be disruptive, but I suspect those that often shout about free speech will stay quiet because it's not 'their side'.
I'm not sure a bit of spray painting is a high enough threshold for terrorism. In fact I'd be far more concerned about how easily they appear to have gained access.
There’s an example above which demonstrates this perfectly.So I’m sure that’s not true
Life sure is easy when you declare yourself one of the ‘goodies’.The war criminal Netanyahu has got his wish then.
It’s clear in Kier Starmer’s world that spray painting a plane is a more heinous crime that the deliberate massacre of a population.
View attachment 43862
If people kill over 50,000 civilians while starving many more you'd imagine there has to be very serious consequences too. Clearly not.If people invade a military airbase in any country there has to be very serious consequences
If people kill over 50,000 civilians while starving many more you'd imagine there has to be very serious consequences too. Clearly not.
The war criminal Netanyahu has got his wish then.
Russia Ukraine, never gad the feeling it could lead to WW3
Same with the Isreal Palestine shit
Same with our invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, etc
This however, has all the ingredients...
You dispute the facts?Stop being a child.
You dispute the facts?
Trespassing the base is a crime, terrorism it is not.There are no relatable facts are there.
The uk has jurisdiction over its own country and it’s a violation of our security.
It doesn’t have jurisdiction over other countries.
“pol pot killed millions of people. We did nothing so we shouldn’t do anything to anyone in the uk who commits crimes”
It’s pathetic
I accept that - but terrorism it most definitely is not.If people invade a military airbase in any country there has to be very serious consequences
Trespassing the base is a crime, terrorism it is not.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?