'Extreme' Protest Groups Face Ban Under Proposal

[naomi24]

//Protest groups such as Just Stop Oil and Palestine Action could be banned in a similar way to terrorist organisations, under a proposal from the government’s adviser on political violence.

An upcoming report from Lord Walney, which BBC News has seen extracts of, will recommend a new category for proscribing "extreme protest groups".

It defines these as those which routinely use criminal tactics to try to achieve their aims.

The sanctions could restrict a group's ability to fundraise and its right to assembly in the UK.

The Home Office said ministers would consider the recommendations.//

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2qv7425gvwo

 

Are you 'for' or 'against'?

[naomi24]

Gromit, what does Lord Walney have against Just Stop Oil?

[Khandro]

Gromit //This 'independent advisor' who wants to stop protests about Israel's genocidal acts in Gaza was recently part of a consortium trying to buy 'The Jewish Chronicle'.//

 

There are no 'genocidal acts' in Gaza. The IDF are removing the proscribed terrorist organisation of Hamas who could end the casualties anytime by surrendering.

 

 

gen·o·cide  (jĕn′ə-sīd′)

n.

The systematic and widespread extermination or attempted extermination of a national, racial, religious, or ethnic group.

 

[Gromit]

Naomi,

From the Morning Star

// THE government’s appointment of former Labour MP John Woodcock to lead an investigation into the “extreme left and right” has been met with dismay by left-wing MPs and campaign groups.

The ousted MP, who now sits in the Lords as Lord Walney, will offer recommendations to Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Home Secretary Priti Patel.

Announcing the review in the Telegraph, he said that the far right is a much bigger threat than the far left, but that there had been isolated incidents of left-wing causes “overstepping the mark into anti-social behaviour,” singling out climate activists Extinction Rebellion (XR).

Former shadow justice secretary Richard Burgon told the Star: “Reports of John Woodcock being empowered by a Conservative government to sit in judgement of the left will be seen by many as a frankly alarming and even somewhat sinister prospect, given the vitriol which he has shown towards the left in the Labour Party.”

And former shadow secretary for women and equalities Dawn Butler questioned why the government has not listened to Britain’s special forces and the UN, both of which have conducted reviews into extremism.

“Instead they have asked the most unsuitable person to investigate,” she said. “This is becoming a pattern of this inept and corrupt government.” //

[ichkeria]

"The orange order were banned..." says one.

"The police don't exercise their powers" says another.

Those observations suggest to me that the powers are already there and we should beware headline grabbing new proposals

[naomi24]

Thank you, Gromit.  The Morning Star - reputable reporting.  🙄

[sp1814]

Well said ichkeria.

Who will be defining these groups as 'extremist'? How can we be sure that our civil liberties are constrained by a future government under the guise of "protecting our freedoms".

Turkeys voting en masse for Christmas again.

[Gromit]

Giving Woodcock the brief to target left/green organisations was clearly mischief making by Boris.

When Starmer rewards Elphicke with a place in the Lords, don't be surpised if she is given a job to annoy her previous party. Looking at Russian Political donations whould be a fun shìt stirring job for her to occupy herself with 😀.

[youngmafbog]

So the far left/commies are against, rational people for.

I see the far left are even quoting The Morning Star now, not even hiding it anymore!

[Khandro]

As soon as this pub closes, the revolution starts!

[andy-hughes]

sandy - // To proscribe them is akin to breaking a butterfly on a wheel. //

There are no resemblances to butterflies in stopping people going about their lawful business, and creating costly acts of wanton vandalism.

These idiots are a menace, and because their batty ideas get no creedence when they simply make a noise, they have escalated to criminal activities, and as such, they must be stopped.

If proscribing them allows the law to do that, then bring it in, tomorrow if possible.

[sandyRoe]

Are there no laws at the minute could deal with these protests?

[sandyRoe]

Whatever happened to 'conduct liable to lead to a breech of the peace'?

It seemed to be a useful catch-all.

[andy-hughes]

sandy- // Are there no laws at the minute could deal with these protests? //

If there are, they are clearly not being enforced with sufficient rigour to deter these idiots from breaking the law whenever their unbalanced minds direct them.

Either the laws need enforcing, or beefing up, or enhancing with the edit of proscribing.

Personally, I'll take any and all measures that stop these self-centred loons from inflicting their ludicrous ideas on society by force and damage.

[sandyRoe]

Sometimes it takes a shove against reactionary forces to bring about change.

Would women have the vote now if Suffragettes hadn't campaigned?

[douglas9401]

Of course extreme protest groups only exist on the opposite side of the fence from where they're viewed.

Stockbrokerbelt Syndrome y'might say.

[ToraToraTora]

stop going on about the suffragettes, they were after something that was and achievable and made sense. JSO are disrupting lives for no possible gain, even if they got their own way it would have zero effect.

[andy-hughes]

Here we go again.

As has been pointed out several times, the Suffragettes' demands were entirely within the bounds of reason, and history suggests that the vote would have been given anyway in time.

To compare them with the twonks who vandalised the Magna Carta casing does a disservice by aligning a valuable and achievable change with the rantings of unhinged, arrogant attention-seekers.

[sandyRoe]

It's better to light a candle( not oil based, of course) than curse the dark.

[andy-hughes]

sandy - // It's better to light a candle( not oil based, of course) than curse the dark. //

Lighting a candle is not wanton vandalism and disruption of citiizens going about their daily lives.

Your platitudes do not assist your argument.

[New Judge]

“Whatever happened to 'conduct liable to lead to a breech of the peace'?

It seemed to be a useful catch-all.”

Nothing happened to it. But it won’t help because in E&W “Breach of the Peace” is not a criminal offence (though it is in Scotland). A police officer can arrest somebody to prevent a breach of the peace and a court can impose a “bind over” on somebody to keep the peace, but nobody can be convicted of it.

One of the problems with these nuisances is that juries have been allowed to consider the political beliefs of those accused of (say) criminal damage as a “reasonable excuse” for their activities. More than that, they have been allowed to argue that, had the owners of the business whose premises they trashed been made aware of the damage their business was causing to the climate, they would have consented to the damage being caused (no, I jest not).  

The government has been tightening the law to prevent these two ludicrous defences being raised. But alas so long as pointlessly parading through the streets generally creating a nuisance to all and sundry is considered a “right” rather than an inconsiderate abomination they will be fighting with both hands tied.

I don't think these idiots are quite intelligent enough to understand that those who agree with them already agree with them. Those who don't will simply become even less likely to do so when they have been incovenienced by them hanging from the Dartford Bridge or walking backwards down Fleet Street at half a mile an hour.