Nobody Cares about Britain

[Innula Zenovka]

I see Banky's latest mural as in a similar spirit to his past projects, including Dismaland and The Walled Off Hotel With far more personal risk attached.

Benevolent Banksy: 10 Times Banksy Has Done Something For Charity | MyArtbroker





‘For Palestine Action to be proscribed primarily for their protests that cause damage to property (and property that falls squarely within the target of their protest, not random or untargeted public infrastructure, for example) is a major and dangerous shift in the law,’ says Martha Spurrier, a human rights barrister and former Director of the advocacy group Liberty."

Moves seeking to ban protests over Palestinian genocide in the UK sadden me. I don't see prohibiting protests as a good way to damp down associated social unrest at all.

The British government banned Palestine Action under an antiterrorism law, but an intelligence document said most of its activity “would not be classified as terrorism.”

The Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism thus (and has done for the last 25 years)

Terrorism: interpretation.
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—

(a)the action falls within subsection (2),

(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and

(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.

(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—

(a)involves serious violence against a person,

(b)involves serious damage to property,

(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,

(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or

(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.

It's difficult to argue that Palestine Action's campaign hasn't several times involved "serious damage to property."

Certainly there's a strong case to be made that proscribing the organisation is a disproportionate infringement of the ECHR article 10 rights (freedom of expression) of supporters of Defend Our Juries.

That's going to be decided in court, by the very judges Banksy is attacking, prematurely to my mind, since no decisions have yet been taken and no prosecutions have yet been brought to court. The judges are the best hope anyone has of overturning the ban, since our elected MPs don't seem likely to do anything about it.

I still, though, keep on asking, how would I want to see anti-abortion protesters treated who adopted Palestine Action's tactics and attacked abortion clinics and advice centres while they were closed, causing no harm to their staff or patients but causing serious damage of their premises and equipment. Or how I would want to see anti-immigration protesters treated, who similarly trashed the offices of asylum support centres and immigration lawyers when they were shut.

I would want organisations like that proscribed, as I imagine would many of Palestine Action's supporters, but I don't think I could reasonably argue that the specific cause for which an organisation was protesting should play any part in the decision whether or not to ban it.

Perhaps you can help me avoid what seems to me the inevitable conclusion that, if I want the hypothetical anti-abortion, or anti-immigration, protesters banned, then I can't really complain about Palestine Action being banned, too.

 

[Ellie]

Re Terrorism act: Not my definition, I'm no expert, which is why I posted the expert judgments of others.

"...the very judges Banksy is attacking"

Is he though? Or are they, as in many of his works, a symbol, like all the rats?

"...anti-abortion protesters treated who adopted Palestine Action's tactics and attacked abortion clinics and advice centres."

Anti-abortion activists who distress women seeking reproductive health care and sometimes abortions (legal in the UK)...

Wait, why did you use "abortion clinics," that's a very loaded term?

To return to my point, abortions are legal under UK law, while genocide is not.

I gotta say, anyone who attacks the saints who run the overloaded and greatly underfunded Citizens Advice Clinics is a cunt in my book.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Re Terrorism act: Not my definition, I'm no expert, which is why I posted the expert judgments of others.

"...the very judges Banksy is attacking"

Is he though? Or are they, as in many of his works, a symbol, like all the rats?

"...anti-abortion protesters treated who adopted Palestine Action's tactics and attacked abortion clinics and advice centres."

Anti-abortion activists who distress women seeking reproductive health care and sometimes abortions (legal in the UK)...

Wait, why did you use "abortion clinics," that's a very loaded term?

To return to my point, abortions are legal under UK law, while genocide is not.

I gotta say, anyone who attacks the saints who run the overloaded and greatly underfunded Citizens Advice Clinics is a cunt in my book.

Quite so, but my question remains unanswered.

To put it in general terms, if a group with whose aims you disagreed, a far right group, for example, were to launch a campaign using similar tactics to those of Palestine Action -- causing serious criminal damage to the premises and equipment of groups they wanted to shut down, while not causing any physical harm to anyone -- would you protest if the government were to use its powers under the Terrorism Act to proscribe the group?

 

[Soen Eber]

Quite so, but my question remains unanswered.

To put it in general terms, if a group with whose aims you disagreed, a far right group, for example, were to launch a campaign using similar tactics to those of Palestine Action -- causing serious criminal damage to the premises and equipment of groups they wanted to shut down, while not causing any physical harm to anyone -- would you protest if the government were to use its powers under the Terrorism Act to proscribe the group?

Charging the individuals involved separately with the appropriate criminal charges should work, or is it a question of not knowing who they are? If I remember right there's cameras sprawling all over the place, or are they intentionally dodging them?

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Charging the individuals involved separately with the appropriate criminal charges should work, or is it a question of not knowing who they are? If I remember right there's cameras sprawling all over the place, or are they intentionally dodging them?

The Terrorism Act targets the organisation rather than the people who actually commit separate criminal offences (in this case, serious criminal damage) in its name. So simply belonging to the organisation is an offence, as are actions taken on its behalf -- fundraising, planning, reconnaissance, recruitment, propagandising and so on.

Perhaps surprisingly to people who aren't familiar with the legislation, Terrorism Act offences generally attract far lower sentences than the regular criminal offences people would normally regard as terrorism.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

BBC News - Trump's coming to Britain. He'll get a spectacular royal welcome but no cheering crowds

Trump loves all things royal. Will that be the King's ace card when he visits?

If anyone can get the president's attention, King Charles and the Royal Family must be close to the top of the list.

www.bbc.com

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

The immediate context of the mural, protests against the prosecution of people demonstrating in support of the Palestine Action group, recently and contentiously proscribed as a terrorist organisation (rightly in my opinion, given the definition of terrorism in British law, but that's an argument for another day) hasn't yet led to any convictions, let alone sentences, so the concern is somewhat premature.

As you correctly stated - yet.

The problem with modern anti terrorist laws in many countries, including Germany and the UK is that they can be applied to a wide range of people. Not only terrorists, but also protesters and so on, who in the past were not put into that drawer.

And this enables the space for abuse of that power. In German we do call this a Gummiparagraph, which you can translate roughly into rubber band law. Which means a law written so vaguely on purpose that it can be applied on a multitude of different things. And also can have a multitude of consequences.

This has been done on purpose by the law maker, and sooner or later will be abused by the judiciary in some cases.

As Amnestiy International puts it: "UK: Arrest of Palestine Action solidarity protest leaders 'a clear violation of international law'."

So we are not still waiting if damage will happen, the damage has already been done by the executive. Question is now if the judiciary will join their camp or not.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

As you correctly stated - yet.

The problem with modern anti terrorist laws in many countries, including Germany and the UK is that they can be applied to a wide range of people. Not only terrorists, but also protesters and so on, who in the past were not put into that drawer.

And this enables the space for abuse of that power. In German we do call this a Gummiparagraph, which you can translate roughly into rubber band law. Which means a law written so vaguely on purpose that it can be applied on a multitude of different things. And also can have a multitude of consequences.

This has been done on purpose by the law maker, and sooner or later will be abused by the judiciary in some cases.

As Amnestiy International puts it: "UK: Arrest of Palestine Action solidarity protest leaders 'a clear violation of international law'."

So we are not still waiting if damage will happen, the damage has already been done by the executive. Question is now if the judiciary will join their camp or not.

There haven't yet been any convictions because charges were brought only recently against the people arrested at the first few demonstrations, and the cases will take time to work their way through the criminal justice system.

On top of the normal delays caused by the need for scheduling court time for each stage in the proceedings, case preparation on both sides and so on, the lawfulness of the proscription is under challenge in the courts, and I doubt the criminal cases will be heard before that's resolved. If the cases do eventually proceed to trial, I would not expect any to be resolved before some time in November at the earliest.

I'm not familiar with the German criminal justice system, but I know the British system is very different from the system in many Continental countries, including (I would imagine) Germany.

Here the judiciary are very much neutral arbiters. The police investigate the alleged offence, and share the results with the Crown Prosecution Service, a separate body. The CPS decide what, if any, charges to bring on the basis of the police investigation. If charges are brought, the CPS shares all the police evidence with the defendant's lawyers, who can ask for further investigation of matters that might assist the defendant.

The judiciary supervises the trial preparation stage, setting the timetable, ensuring everything is proceeding on schedule, and settling procedural disputes. When the trial begins, the judge ensures that the correct legal procedures are followed and directs the jury on matters of law.

The judge doesn't have any discretion at all about what charges are brought. That's up to the prosecution. The judge may, when the prosecution concludes its case, rule that the evidence doesn't support the charges and dismiss the case altogether, but that's as far as it goes.

If the first few cases make it to trial and conviction, I would imagine there will be several appeals on Human Rights grounds, and nothing much will happen until those are resolved.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Channel 4 to mark Trump’s UK visit with ‘longest uninterrupted reel of untruths’

The US president is expected to arrive in the UK on Tuesday night. He will enjoy a huge amount of special treatment as ministers attempt to preserve the special relationship, including a ceremonial welcome at Windsor Castle for Trump and his wife, Melania.


However, Channel 4 is dedicating its Wednesday night schedule to unpicking what it describes as the falsehoods expressed by Trump since taking office in a broadcast that insiders said would last several hours.

Trump v The Truth, starting at 10pm, is expected to cover everything from the president’s false boast that his administration had “stopped $50m being sent to Gaza to buy condoms for Hamas”, to his debunked claim to have sent Ukraine more than $300bn (£220bn) in wartime aid.

“Donald J Trump loves making history,” said Ian Katz, Channel 4’s chief content officer. “So, on Wednesday Channel 4 will do just that: we’ll show what we believe to be the longest uninterrupted reel of untruths, falsehoods and distortions ever broadcast on television.

“We hope it will remind viewers how disorientating and dangerous the world becomes when the most powerful man on Earth shows little regard for the truth. And if President Trump cares to watch along after the state banquet, he may even clear up a few misconceptions.”

 

[Free]

Channel 4 to mark Trump’s UK visit with ‘longest uninterrupted reel of untruths’

"untruths, falsehoods and distortions"...Katz recently criticised what he called an “increasingly timid broadcasting environment” in the UK.

I'm pretty sure untimid people are not afraid to use the word "lies."

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I'm pretty sure untimid people are not afraid to use the word "lies."

Here’s the essential skill for assessing our politics: knowing the difference between lies and bullshit

 

[Ellie]

Jurno Jonathon Cook's account of attending the protest.

But what the British government has done is make the equivalent conversation today about Palestine Action impossible – if you don’t want to be convicted of terrorism and spend up to 14 years in jail.

That ought to outrage anyone who believes in the importance of British democracy – whatever political party they support, or however they feel about the slaughter and maiming of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza..

Nothing the Met says about the Palestine Action demo should be trusted

 

[Free]

Here’s the essential skill for assessing our politics: knowing the difference between lies and bullshit

Thanks, but I've read the nearly seminal work on that topic.

On Bullshit

Over one million copies sold worldwideThe international and #1 New York Times bestsellerThe anniversary edition of the acclaimed book that reveals why bullshit is more dangerous than lying

press.princeton.edu

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Thanks, but I've read the nearly seminal work on that topic.

On Bullshit

Over one million copies sold worldwideThe international and #1 New York Times bestsellerThe anniversary edition of the acclaimed book that reveals why bullshit is more dangerous than lying

press.princeton.edu

It is a lot easier to get "falsehoods" past the legal department than it is "lies."

 

[Free]

It is a lot easier to get "falsehoods" past the legal department than it is "lies."

Katz recently criticised what he called an “increasingly timid broadcasting environment” in the UK.

I'm not striking at the UK press here (and I appreciate what Channel 4 is doing here with their broadcast). The press in the U.S. are little more than church mice on a Sunday morning when it comes to this...bullshit.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Why Trump's UK state visit is mired with potential pitfalls

Months of preparations have gone into this state visit - but the Lord Mandelson question is not the only concern troubling insiders.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Innula Zenovka]

The Guardian: How huge London far-right march lifted the lid on a toxic transatlantic soup

 

[Innula Zenovka]

And he;'s arrived -- Donald Trump lands in UK for second state visit as protesters gather in Windsor

Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, isn't pleased to see him: After the far right’s march on our streets, Londoners must show Trump we reject his politics of fear

 

[Tigger]

Yeah, 4 people arrested for "malicious communication" after an unauthorised projection.

What's malicious about the truth? Should have projected Prince Andrew up there too.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Yeah, 4 people arrested for "malicious communication" after an unauthorised projection.

What's malicious about the truth? Should have projected Prince Andrew up there too.

I don't see how that can possibly malicious communication, which catches phone calls, texts, emails and social media.

My guess is that that whoever was in charge of the police presence was told the king didn't like having images projected on his castle (or, more likely, one of the palace officials didn't like it), and they should make it go away. Asking Led By Donkeys to cooperate didn't work so they had to arrest them for something, and by the time the case file reaches the CPS, who will almost certainly bat it back with a note about not taking the piss, Trump will be safely out of the country.

ETA

Three reasons why the UK should break with Trump

(America is not our friend)

nickcohen.substack.com

Evernote Link