Guess which the UK government calls terrorism
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/22/israel-palestine-action-uk-government-terrorism-sally-rooney
"Government [of U.K.] confirms it will ban Palestine Action group under anti-terrorism laws"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/jun/23/david-lammy-us-strikes-iran-labour-keir-starmer-uk-politics-latest-updates-news?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-685947898f08c5412c197691#block-685947898f08c5412c197691
Of course. The government of U.K. has a very strong stance in active support of genocide, so speech against and taking direct action against the weapons used for genocide can not be allowed in England this year of 1725.
So there is the correct answer to the poll that I tooted yesterday, although that poll is just about to close.
"‘It’s a complete assault on free speech’: how Palestine Action was targeted for proscription as terrorists"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2025/jun/28/palestine-action-proscription-free-speech
Their most "violent" actions have been to paint buildings and military jet engines (latter being tanker transport planes' engines painted for "direct participation in the commission of genocide and war crimes across the Middle East") and smashing some windows of those actively voluntarily contributing to ongoing genocide.
Not terrorism. By this redefinition some regular folks' rowdy nights out partying at the local pub could also be "terrorism".
But with the right-wing Starmer-headed leadership of the centrist "Labour" party being so firmly supportive of and aiding genocides, etc, it can not let people speak freely to protest its policies and actions claimed on behalf of all the people as that draws attention to its own criminal culpability and as a crucial mechanism of any claimed democracy would assuredly unless quashed lose these (ir)responsible rulers the election votes of every voter with a still functioning personal moral compass.
Because unfortunately it's still accurate, also in this urgent context, I'll just again post this picture that I originally made in 2015 regarding the still ongoing but now largely completed redefinition of the word "terrorist".
─────
Terrorist (noun, \ˈter-ər-ˌi-zt\)
[actually satire, written by @b9AcE, originally in 2015]
1 a: a person of oppressed ethnic group that is not actively participating in oppressing the same or other ethnic groups on behalf of the ruling group
b: a muslim or anyone that could be mistaken for a muslim regardless of personal actions or beliefs
c: an anarchist, communist, environmental activist or anti-fascist regardless of variants or personal actions
d: any person that alerts the general public of illegal acts performed by public authorities
e: librarians
f: an expert at programming and solving problems with a computer
g: any non-combatant killed by what would otherwise be legally defined as a war crime
2 (archaic): person employing systematic use of terror especially as means of coercion
─────
"Palestine Action documentary makers fear being criminalised under anti-terror laws" https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/jun/29/palestine-action-documentary-makers-fear-being-criminalised-under-anti-terror-laws as the knowingly actively significantly and personally co-culpable right-wing Starmer-lead regime in a direct assault against the foundation of the very concept of democracy seek to prevent the general public from being shown that Palestine Action under no reasonable person's understanding of the word do anything actually reasonably describable as "terrorism",
but instead do what is the moral imperative for any person able to, and the legally required minimum for that government itself to, act against an ongoing actual genocide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8r-_k47cqU ←trailer
Website: https://www.tokillawarmachine.com
"Palestine Action is part of Britain’s proud history of protest. Proscribing it is an assault on democracy"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/29/palestine-action-protest-proscribing-assault-democracy
"UK lawmakers approve ban of Palestine Action as terrorist group" https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-lawmakers-approve-ban-palestine-action-terrorist-group-2025-07-02/ in spite of the group never having done anything regular people or by comparison to centuries of common practice would consider actual terrorism, but is instead clearly a ban solely for the purpose of silencing political speech opposed to the rulers' informed actively maintained and escalated pro-genocide, pro-war crimes, pro-crimes against humanity policies and actions, which are such that the rulers are in fact required by their own self-imposed rules ("law") to not just stop but also even to prevent, but they instead directly aid, protect and enable these violations.
Thought Police arrests to enforce pro-genocide opinion is now a thing in the U.K. under right-wing Starmer-led government,
as >20 people were arrested for supporting Palestine Action opposing the current Palestinian Genocide which the current government and its sibling Tory-opposition are all in on actively aiding.
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-police-arrest-over-20-supporters-now-banned-palestine-action-group-2025-07-05/
The Palestine Action group has consistently exclusively committed actions firmly within the recent centuries of established political protest, back to the Suffragettes and beyond, but now redefined as "terrorism" by the genocide-supporting ruling class, threatening the very foundation of anything claimable as democracy.
I could fully understand this if it was just a few groups calling what is happening Genocide, but the UN and other well resected bodies are doing the same, including the UN rapporteur featured in the talk video posted here. So what does Sir Kier have to say about that now.
If the UN issues an arrest warrant, will the police execute.
A court can take that in to consideration, you start off with good intention then something happens, or you learn new information and you change your stance,
@zleap Yes, but only up to such a point that the person(s) reasonably should be considered to already have been sufficiently informed, such as say for example by the ICJ, UN-experts, HRW, Amnesty, MSF, etc statements all strongly indicating consensus... I believe.
@b9AcE
Indeed, adn thanks I thinlk you summed up my thinking. I think starmer seems finished, not sure what standpoint this new political party will take, or if they will be clear on the matter.
@zleap My guess is that the reason Starmer, et al keep going to such exremes in support of genocide is the same as is probably the case in similar contexts and other locations, that if they would now stop aiding the atrocities, then that change of stance is an admission of themselves having been wrong previously and very probably that could be used to prosecute them for their after undeniably being informed actively significantly aiding genocide, crimes against humanity, systematic explicitly admitted intended war crimes, etc, so it's purely egoistic abuse of the police and political system.