The Police - keeping us safe

Quicksilvera said:
Palestine Action did not have any verified evidence showing exactly what these aircraft were being used for when they vandalised them and it’s very much a he said she said.

These aircraft are capable of carrying troops, equipment, and supplies, but there is no confirmation that they were delivering military aid to Israel, it is very much a rumour what these planes were being used for and they were not some planes belonging to a ‘private equity group’, this is complete nonsense.

Whilst Palestine Action believed the planes were involved in supporting Israel during the conflict in Gaza, this has not been substantiated by independent sources or the UK Ministry of Defence.

Regardless , there is no defending the damage caused. Actions like this risk undermining the organisation’s credibility and alienating broader public support, which can ultimately weaken the impact of their message.
Click to expand...
The Voyager planes are owned by AirTanker Services, a private limited company with a long-term contract with the RAF
 
Quicksilvera said:
Palestine Action did not have any verified evidence showing exactly what these aircraft were being used for when they vandalised them and it’s very much a he said she said.

These aircraft are capable of carrying troops, equipment, and supplies, but there is no confirmation that they were delivering military aid to Israel, it is very much a rumour what these planes were being used for and they were not some planes belonging to a ‘private equity group’, this is complete nonsense.

Whilst Palestine Action believed the planes were involved in supporting Israel during the conflict in Gaza, this has not been substantiated by independent sources or the UK Ministry of Defence.

Regardless , there is no defending the damage caused. Actions like this risk undermining the organisation’s credibility and alienating broader public support, which can ultimately weaken the impact of their message.
Click to expand...
"this has not been substantiated by independent sources or the UK Ministry of Defence."
The UK MoD will say what the Government tells it to :-) if it happens to intersect with the truth, that would be great...
I don't particularly support the cause here, just know there has been a massive long list of lies and obfuscations of justice by the British State over the years so the idea they've got this particular bunch bang to rights would surprise me. They couldn't even arrest the right people during the Just Stop Oil protests, preferring to arrest journalists for doing their job
 
Quicksilvera said:
Palestine Action did not have any verified evidence showing exactly what these aircraft were being used for when they vandalised them and it’s very much a he said she said.

These aircraft are capable of carrying troops, equipment, and supplies, but there is no confirmation that they were delivering military aid to Israel, it is very much a rumour what these planes were being used for and they were not some planes belonging to a ‘private equity group’, this is complete nonsense.

Whilst Palestine Action believed the planes were involved in supporting Israel during the conflict in Gaza, this has not been substantiated by independent sources or the UK Ministry of Defence.

Regardless , there is no defending the damage caused. Actions like this risk undermining the organisation’s credibility and alienating broader public support, which can ultimately weaken the impact of their message.
Click to expand...

"not been substantiated by independent sources or the UK Ministry of Defence."

Hardly surprising since the government’s refusal to answer questions—coupled with its suppression of evidence and vague justifications—reflects a deliberate strategy to shield UK involvement in Gaza from democratic oversight.

"there is no defending the damage"

I am not trying to. There are laws against criminal damage that can be brought to bear. I am saying that it doesn't amount to terrorism.
 
Quicksilvera said:
Palestine Action did not have any verified evidence showing exactly what these aircraft were being used for when they vandalised them and it’s very much a he said she said.

These aircraft are capable of carrying troops, equipment, and supplies, but there is no confirmation that they were delivering military aid to Israel, it is very much a rumour what these planes were being used for and they were not some planes belonging to a ‘private equity group’, this is complete nonsense.

Whilst Palestine Action believed the planes were involved in supporting Israel during the conflict in Gaza, this has not been substantiated by independent sources or the UK Ministry of Defence.

Regardless , there is no defending the damage caused. Actions like this risk undermining the organisation’s credibility and alienating broader public support, which can ultimately weaken the impact of their message.
Click to expand...
From the Grauniad:
"A defence source said the attack was based on a misconception. The UK does not provide refuelling to support Israeli military operations, the person said. Two aircraft were being checked for damage and no planned flights or operations were affected, they added."
 
I think they need to redirect their energy to something that will be more frugal and not just pi55 people off. They’re going to lose most of their support.

I want them to succeed with their message.
 
"That one plane being out of action could potentially have had massive repercussions and yes cost the tax payer millions."

The government isn't a business that has to make profit. There are no imminent threats to this country. In the current circumstances how could this have massive repercussions. You are massively overstating your case.
 
redrobbo said:
"That one plane being out of action could potentially have had massive repercussions and yes cost the tax payer millions."

The government isn't a business that has to make profit. There are no imminent threats to this country. In the current circumstances how could this have massive repercussions. You are massively overstating your case.
Click to expand...
No threats to this country are you mad?

People deploy on operations daily, stopping that is the repercussion and it costs millions and has a knock on effect to travel around the world, I have experienced first hand.
 
Quicksilvera said:
No threats to this country are you mad?

People deploy on operations daily, stopping that is the repercussion and it costs millions and has a knock on effect to travel around the world, I have experienced first hand.
Click to expand...

Please expand. Note here, I am talking about military threats that require the deployment of armed forces. I am not talking about action in support of imperial activity, but action in defence of the realm.
 
Last edited:
I get the message and I support it, I stand against Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

As an ex soldier who’s been in a patrol base with minimal supplies and has had to wait weeks on end for basics i am dead against their actions at Brize Norton and think all they are doing is getting the British populations back up and being unsympathetic towards their message.

Their actions could have had some serious consequences.
 
Quicksilvera said:
I get the message and I support it, I stand against Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

As an ex soldier who’s been in a patrol base with minimal supplies and has had to wait weeks on end for basics i am dead against their actions at Brize Norton and think all they are doing is getting the British populations back up and being unsympathetic towards their message.

Their actions could have had some serious consequences.
Click to expand...
I note that you didn't answer my previous question:

"Please expand. Note here, I am talking about military threats that require the deployment of armed forces. I am not talking about action in support of imperial activity, but action in defence of the realm."

And you are still talking about serious consequences.

I appreciate that spraying a couple of of planes with paint causes some damage and inconvenience to the RAF and I am not suggesting that those involved shouldn't be prosecuted for criminal damage. What I am extremely skeptical about is the idea that this has anything more than de minimus in terms of its impact on national security such that it should be treated as terrorism.
 
Perhaps The Spectator and Rod Liddle should be prescribed.

bsky.app

Marina Purkiss (@marina-purkiss.bsky.social)

Where is the moral panic? Where are @lisanandy and @Keir_Starmer? Or are we saying Rod Liddle can use his national platform to call for state violence and it’s fine But if Bob Vylan chants about actual state violence it’s “incitement”? At least try to be consistent.
bsky.app bsky.app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top