You mean Palestine Action specifically, because the leadership of that group are violent terrorists.

It's weird how you people never notice that NOBODY else is "arrested"

Over 2,000 middle aged women have been arrested as terrorists on the basis of holding protest signs though, it's been widely reported.

▲

gaiagraphia 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Are middle-aged women too much of a protected class to be held responsible for their actions?

If I went to practically anywhere in the world and started publicly expressing support for groups which are actively attacking military facilities and key infrastructure, I'd be arrested.

▲

cassianoleal 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Funny u/JumpCrisscross who was asking for sources has now deleted the post with the question.

> Since July last year, police have arrested at least 2,787 people across the UK for holding signs displaying statements such as “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action”, according to the civil liberties organisation Defend Our Juries.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/feb/16/arrested-ret...

> An 83-year-old was arrested alongside 64 other people at a pro-Palestine protest in Liverpool city centre.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1wg4e1nlrjo

> "The law does not have an age limit", the head of the Metropolitan Police said after an 83-year-old retired priest was arrested for supporting a banned protest group.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9vrjkev802o

And in the same above article there's an explanation about why this "violent terrorist group" has been banned:

> The move to ban the organisation was announced after two Voyager aircraft were sprayed with red paint at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on 20 June. It caused about £7m of damage, police said.

Their violence was against capital.

▲

pjc50 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I agree with you generally but the RAF are part of the state and not meaningfully "capital". If you attack the military then yes obviously you are going to get the book thrown at you. That does _not_ justify going after the people with signs.

▲

cassianoleal 2 hours ago | parent [-]

They painted the aircraft.

▲

pjc50 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Not just that: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce950111xk7o

"Corner, a former student at the University of Oxford, was also convicted of causing grievous bodily harm after he fractured Sgt Kate Evans' spine with a sledgehammer in the raid."

But again, let's be clear: that justifies the conviction of the person with the hammer. Not the people with signs.

	▲	cassianoleal 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ugh, thank you - I was not aware of this. I agree with you - this should have got that person prosecuted. People with signs is perhaps a tad exaggerated.

▲

cryo32 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They actually hacked holes in the things with a crowbar too. That didn't do as much damage as expected though.

And they videoed themselves doing it and published that.

And the aircraft weren't usable in the Israel-Palestine conflict but were in the Ukraine one. You have to wonder considering the Russian connections of the principal sponsor of Palestine Action: Fergie Chambers. Worth reading up on him.

▲

bluescrn 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Vandalised military assets on a miltary site.

Actions of a traitor or enemy saboteur. Lucky they didn't get shot.

Some of these protesters seem to think they're invincible these days because they support a popular cause (Palestine or climate, usually). They need to get a grip on what reasonable 'direct action' is. Obstructive protests are generally OK, Destructive protests aren't.

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

mytailorisrich 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They did that on purpose, though: Palestine Action has been banned on the basis of being a "terror organisation", this means that supporting them is a criminal offence. Knowing that, they purposedly propested by holding signs saying that they supported Palestine Action... and therefore they were arrested as expected (and really the police has no choice in such cases not to undermine the rule of law).

Note what the Court of Appeal said when ruling that the ban on terror grounds was legal:

[It was] "a fundamental mistake to overlook the fact that Palestine Action overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism. It is not - as claimed - a direct action civil disobedience protest group like the suffragettes, operating transparently in the open. It is a covert organisation which operates with secret cells to avoid the detection and prosecution of those using violence to destroy property and cause injury. " [1]

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gy927jx88o

	▲	OgsyedIE 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The suffragettes committed dozens of assaults and arsons and at least one deployment of an IED, which suggests bad faith in the interest of political orthodoxy by Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr.