Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

netpol.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 224 posts

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#141

Post by dfawcus »

happymellon wrote: post #69
ThrowawayTestr wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't that group attack an RAF base?

Attack is a strong word for throwing a can of paint. After the 2024 riots there were mass arrests and prosecution, but only talk about reviewing groups as to whether they should be proscribed. Why does a member throwing a can of paint get you classed as a terrorist organisation, while organising riots that involve throwing molotov's and causing serious injury not? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_rio…

Their initial statement the day of (or after) the action at the RAF base was something like:

  "disabled aircraft using paint and crowbars"
Which even if they didn't use crowbars, then would seem to require the turbines be inspected for alignment and physical damage.

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#142

Post by foldr »

piltdownman wrote: post #77
foldr wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what changes specifically are we talking about? The amendment that dvt linked to doesn’t have to do with labeling dissenting movements as subversive. It’s still rather unclear to me which specific piece of pending legislation (if any!) the article is referring to.

It's on the back of Jonathan Hall KC and Government Announcements in the recent past following the Palestine Action proscription - e.g. the UK Government recently saying it would amend sections 12 and 14 of the Public Order Act 1986 to further impose conditions on public protests and assemblies. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-police-powers-to-prot... The changes to the law would allow police officers to consi…

This seems to confirm that the headline claim is based on little more than a hunch. At least, you haven’t pointed to any pending legislation or official government announcements relating to a new legal definition of ‘subversion’.

So HN is having an entire discussion on the basis of one journalist’s irresponsibly sloppy headline writing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You may think that the journalist’s hunch is justified in this case, but to report that the government is planning something, when that is merely a somewhat informed guess at what the government may eventually do, is just bad journalism.

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#143

Post by g8oz »

belorn wrote: post #117
willahmad wrote: post #108

Why is it my earlier comment with so many upvotes got [flagged] ? Is it because I mentioned the entity name? Here is the comment: "It’s ironic how the West has long championed democracy, demanded freedom of speech, and called for human rights from everyone. Only to suddenly adopt authoritarian, anti-free speech, anti-human rights, and anti-protest stances the moment free speech began to critique Israel. It’s truly sh…

Religious conflict is old enough to gone through every kind of modern and non-modern ideology, including freedom of speech and humans rights. Why would the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which has been ongoing since late 19th century, be a major driver in west ideology? It is not a suddenly adaptation of authoritarian, anti-free speech, anti-human rights. Die Gedanken sind frei demonstrates that people been fighting f…

Western elites are absolutely obsessed with Israel. You can see it by the way how every value goes out the window when they and/or Zionism is being criticized. Hysterical overreaction every time.

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#147

Post by happymellon »

dfawcus wrote: post #141
happymellon wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attack is a strong word for throwing a can of paint. After the 2024 riots there were mass arrests and prosecution, but only talk about reviewing groups as to whether they should be proscribed. Why does a member throwing a can of paint get you classed as a terrorist organisation, while organising riots that involve throwing molotov's and causing serious injury not? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_rio…

Their initial statement the day of (or after) the action at the RAF base was something like: "disabled aircraft using paint and crowbars" Which even if they didn't use crowbars, then would seem to require the turbines be inspected for alignment and physical damage.

> disabled aircraft using paint and crowbars

Is that "terror"?

Besides, why not prosecute them for their actions, why proscribe the organisation as a terrorist one, while at the same time ignoring groups who commit much more violent offenses (such as the one given) and concentrate on prosecuting "personal responsibility"?

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#149

Post by sph »

ahoka wrote: post #10
sph wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” History, just like everything else in Nature, is cyclical.

I hate this quote as it is usually recited by those “weak men”.

And those that hate the quote are the “strong men”? Given the many complaints about it, instead of trying to read between the lines about history being proved time and time again to be cyclical, I wouldn’t be so sure.

The responses, ranging from political partisanship, ad hominem, to being offended by the choice of words, are certainly a sign of the times.

Post reply on HN