1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Insulate Britain and Extinction Rebellion, domestic terrorists?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Keltyx, 15 Sep 2021.

  1. Keltyx

    Gangster

    Joined: 12 Sep 2003

    Posts: 479

    Location: Swansea, UK

    These organisations are using disruptive tactics to gain mainstream media attention for their agendas. I totally support the agenda they are both fighting for, but are they going too far?

    I think they should be viewed as domestic terrorists, disrupting domestic infrastructure should absolutely put them in this category. Can you imagine Islamic extremists pushing sharia law in this manner being allowed to disrupt for so long? If we let these protests continue without applying serious repercussions for those involved it opens up the door for other organisations to do the same to push their agenda/message.

    Has your support for these organisations increased with these protests or is your support waning, I know mine is waning.

    The crown prosecution service defines terrorism as
     
    Last edited: 15 Sep 2021
  2. On Holiday

    Soldato

    Joined: 29 Dec 2009

    Posts: 6,776

    Terrorist? What do you mean? They're white. </ocuk>
     
  3. FoxEye

    Caporegime

    Joined: 17 Feb 2006

    Posts: 28,302

    Location: Cornwall

    That can't be the whole definition of terrorism - as quoted it seems to be really broad... wouldn't that also cover strike action, peaceful protest, etc... Surely the action has to be violent in some way.
     
  4. ianh

    Soldato

    Joined: 12 Jul 2007

    Posts: 6,109

    Location: Saudi and occasionally Stoke.

    I'd say No as it'd be a hard sell legally even if a lot of the public may agree, mainly due to the current wording of "action or threat of action" when XR etc only being static/passive protest such a blocking roads etc. However, if "disrupting domestic infrastructure" was applied to the current definition of Terrorism sometime in the future then they (XR etc) could be looking at some serious jail time.
     
  5. Zatoichi.uK

    Mobster

    Joined: 13 Sep 2005

    Posts: 3,533

    No because they are not using violence to achieve political aims. They are a bunch of **** heads though and many of their actions will have lost public support rather than gain it.
     
  6. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 13 Oct 2006

    Posts: 77,982

    Sometimes you have to take extreme measures to get attention for an issues but it is debatable that is what is required here.

    Obviously traffic hold ups can happen for other reasons but for me these recent protests have an unacceptable chance of endangering innocent lives, disrupting emergency services, disrupting people who might be on their way to an emergency appointment or to help an elderly family member who might be in need i.e. had a bit of a fall, etc. or even just people on their way to pick up kids from school and stuff like that.

    I think it is a fine line with some of the recent protests even if maybe not intended to cause these kinds of problems.
     
  7. touch

    Capodecina

    Joined: 28 Oct 2006

    Posts: 11,940

    Location: Sufferlandria

    This makes change.org and similar sites some of the most prolific terrorist organisations in the UK.
     
  8. Raymond Lin

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: 20 Oct 2002

    Posts: 68,347

    Location: Wish i was in .Lethal's house

    Can we quote the rest of the paragraph? If you were to cut it off, why not just stop at "Terrorism is the use or threat of action"? eh?

    https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism

    Protest, as in walking around on the street with a sign shouting does not pose a threat to your life?

    It might disrupt your daily routine but you are not threatened by some flags and shouting are you?

    Also, have to point out that the legislation includes these above but not limited to offences under the Terrorism Act 2000 (TA 2000) and Terrorism Act 2006 (TA 2006)..
     
  9. Keltyx

    Gangster

    Joined: 12 Sep 2003

    Posts: 479

    Location: Swansea, UK

    This doesn't mean those listed are the only examples, just a limited subset. Plus, disrupting infrastructure is equivalent to "disrupt an electronic system"

    Road blocks stopping/delaying a fire engine or ambulance attending an emergency would
     
  10. FoxEye

    Caporegime

    Joined: 17 Feb 2006

    Posts: 28,302

    Location: Cornwall

    I don't think that's the legal definition of terrorism. It's just a public information website.

    The legalese is probably very different.
     
  11. touch

    Capodecina

    Joined: 28 Oct 2006

    Posts: 11,940

    Location: Sufferlandria

    By your logic the Labour Party are a terrorist organisation:
    [​IMG]
    They are using an action (making a facebook post) which is designed to influence a government organisation ("We're calling on Boris Johnson to cancel the cut")
     
  12. Raymond Lin

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: 20 Oct 2002

    Posts: 68,347

    Location: Wish i was in .Lethal's house

    Then they will take each individual on a case by case basis.

    But my point is that you are cherry picking a link to bend to your agenda from the get-go, which puts your whole argument into the bin.
     
  13. dLockers

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 21 Jan 2010

    Posts: 7,637

    yep
     
  14. cheesyboy

    Capodecina

    Joined: 7 Dec 2012

    Posts: 15,069

    Location: Gloucestershire

    Yes.

    Our terrorism laws are ******* insane. Remember, they were used against Icelandic banks during the credit crunch and against the MP expenses whistleblower.
     
  15. FortuitousFluke

    Mobster

    Joined: 7 Jul 2011

    Posts: 4,401

    Location: Cambridgeshire

    Wow, so anybody who has ever written to their MP to make a request is technically a terrorist, good stuff.
     
  16. Keltyx

    Gangster

    Joined: 12 Sep 2003

    Posts: 479

    Location: Swansea, UK

    You're being incredibly terse there, these organisations are disrupting peoples way of life and day to day activities. The facebook post like you have quoted has no notable/potential consequences.
     
  17. Moley

    Mobster

    Joined: 29 Aug 2006

    Posts: 3,552

    Location: In a world of my own

    Some of you may remember that a good few years ago lorry drivers blockaded fuel refineries for some sort of protest. Their leaders were visited by MI5 who told them they were at risk of bring the country to a halt (we have enough fuel at a time for three days apparently) and as such they would be held under the terrorism act and spend the next 20 years in jail. The protests stopped overnight. I suggest something similar for these plebs.
     
  18. Chuk_Chuk

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 May 2014

    Posts: 2,768

    Sometime being a dick relies on other people being kind and accepting your behaviour. All it takes is one car to run someone over and the protesters would see sense and move themselves off the road.
     
  19. Diddums

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Oct 2012

    Posts: 20,945

    Location: London

    Nothing says "we need to fight pollution" like forcing hundreds, if not thousands of cars to stand idling in a city centre for hours on end.

    I support their cause, I just think that they undermine their entire MO with their frankly stupid approaches. No, i don't know what the correct approach is.
     
  20. Moley

    Mobster

    Joined: 29 Aug 2006

    Posts: 3,552

    Location: In a world of my own

    "Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding"