I guessed something like this was going to come out in the trials. Still think proscription was a counterproductive over-reaction, but clearly PA themselves were going further than I think a lot of people assumed.
I guessed something like this was going to come out in the trials. Still think proscription was a counterproductive over-reaction, but clearly PA themselves were going further than I think a lot of people assumed.
I’m not sure why that justifies attempting to smash someone’s spine by, not once, but twice swinging and hitting someone.
Just take a step back. Do you support violence? Of any kind? I’m guessing not given your baton comments. So violence presented with a sledgehammer in the name of Palestine Action should also not be something you apologise for.
Yes. Violence is justified if it prevents greater harm or in self defence.
Do you support WW2 veterans? They perpetrated huge amounts of violence, to prevent the Nazis performing greater harm.
Violence is sometimes justified.
We haven’t seen the evidence, I’m willing to concede if the video shows unjust use of force. But they haven’t released the evidence to us yet, and in my eyes seem to have put a huge deal of spin doctoring on this story to illicit an emotional rather than rational response.
At the moment, without the evidence ourselves, cops bash people’s heads in every day, who cares if the reverse is done to them whilst trying to stop the machinery of war and genocide?
False equivalency. The act of violence was against Elbit system in smashing their equipment. Not the policewoman called to prevent a criminal act. You’re basically trying to hand wave war crimes by saying anything that you do in war is justified. How does breaking someone’s spine contribute to stopping genocide on Palestine? Listen to yourself.
Nobody is looking to justify unlawful violence by the police. And we should all care because I bet nobody wants to live in an increasingly violent community where people think it’s ok to beat people up because they disagree with them.
Why was it not possible to smash up the machines and building as a way of protest but when confronted by security and police stop and hold their hands up? They would have achieved their aims of going after the companies contributing to genocide. But they had to actively assault people as well? I don’t understand that logic. It’s a frighteningly violent logic.