Climate protesters block roads
Discussion
MadCaptainJack said:
HarryW said:
One for the lawyers perhaps, but if the judge directs there is no defence in law then finding them not guilty in court is Shirley not legal outcome. No wonder they wanted to review their T&C’s again before coming to that verdict.
It's called jury nullification and I believe it is of critical importance in defending a free democracy. There's a real danger that a proliferation of laws and regulations - some of which may have been well-meaning but are used in ways that were not intended by the drafters - can be used to restrict human rights, control and stifle dissent, and even place private interests above those of the public. The right to a jury trial (which has itself been eroded over time), along with the right of jury members to make a decision and pass judgment independently, help protect against miscarriages of justice.
You may not agree with the jury's decision in this case but they were perfectly within their rights to do what they did, and protecting those rights is infinitely more important than ensuring that the prosecution gets its way.
however this was a charge of criminal damage, which was proved. It was not a peaceful process with trumped up charges.
They overstepped the Mark for protest by any stretch of the imagination and should be held to account.
The fact that a jury inexplicably could not see that and decided it was OK to ignore the facts could open the doors to anarchy if it is not challenged.
HarryW said:
Don’t get me wrong, I believe in jury trials and being judged by your peers... I also understand why jury’s would fail to convict someone on a ‘bad law’.
however this was a charge of criminal damage, which was proved. It was not a peaceful process with trumped up charges.
They overstepped the Mark for protest by any stretch of the imagination and should be held to account.
The fact that a jury inexplicably could not see that and decided it was OK to ignore the facts could open the doors to anarchy if it is not challenged.
Is there a separate thread anywhere discussing this verdict, or any transcript available? Because I too don't get it. How can it ever be morally justifiable to commit criminal damage.however this was a charge of criminal damage, which was proved. It was not a peaceful process with trumped up charges.
They overstepped the Mark for protest by any stretch of the imagination and should be held to account.
The fact that a jury inexplicably could not see that and decided it was OK to ignore the facts could open the doors to anarchy if it is not challenged.
Smiler. said:
ATG said:
If you'd actually met any XR people you'd know that it is absurd to suggest they're all "just anarchists" or are gullible plonkers who've been hoodwinked by a bunch of anarchists. Obviously some of them are a fully fledged tie died hippies (and we need no more evidence than that they live in Stroud, home of the hemp and spelt flapjack), but equally plenty of them choose to use soap and are otherwise perfectly normal, thoughtful, educated, responsible citizens. My view is that they are playing a dangerous but surprisingly effective game with their campaign of pretty mild civil disobedience. I expected there to have been much more of a backlash against them than there has been. In fact they seem to have met with a surprising degree of support.
An example of how they are in fact rather mainstream; they held a hustings earlier this evening for the up-coming Senedd elections. How anarchistic is that??!? Participating in the parliamentary democratic process; clear evidence of trying to overthrow the system.
Unsurprisingly the Tory candidate refused the invite on the basis of being incompatible with democracy blah blah blah ... vacuous, pompous, cowardly, tone-deaf, etc. All the other parties accepted and participated in a high quality, good-natured discussion. If you're not prepared to turn up and say "I don't think criminal damage is acceptable" you're just spineless. The other parties' candidates managed to do this; why couldn't the Conservatives? If someone is genuinely concerned that groups like XR are undermining the political process, why not engage with them when they're clearly open to that engagement?
A bit like the IRA.An example of how they are in fact rather mainstream; they held a hustings earlier this evening for the up-coming Senedd elections. How anarchistic is that??!? Participating in the parliamentary democratic process; clear evidence of trying to overthrow the system.
Unsurprisingly the Tory candidate refused the invite on the basis of being incompatible with democracy blah blah blah ... vacuous, pompous, cowardly, tone-deaf, etc. All the other parties accepted and participated in a high quality, good-natured discussion. If you're not prepared to turn up and say "I don't think criminal damage is acceptable" you're just spineless. The other parties' candidates managed to do this; why couldn't the Conservatives? If someone is genuinely concerned that groups like XR are undermining the political process, why not engage with them when they're clearly open to that engagement?
"We can't convince people that we are going to have to do without food. We can't convince people that they're going to have to do without more flights. We can't convince people that they are going to maybe have to see their child die because we don't simply have the machinery and technology to keep them alive any longer."
Nice. So democracy must be circumvented aka overthrown. As another XR bigwig pointed out, it's not about the climate.
Some years back an associate attended a climate conference, iirc at the prestigious Tyndall Centre. They were expecting a mix of science and politics in terms of mitigation and adaptation. What they got was poster papers and discussions on how society could be returned to groups of localised hunter-gatherers. The event goings on weren't publicised widely but there was limited coverage.
Even though this sort of nonsense has been around for decades and is more prevalent now, it's still not clear we've reached peak sixth-form.
turbobloke said:
Some years back an associate attended a climate conference, iirc at the prestigious Tyndall Centre. They were expecting a mix of science and politics in terms of mitigation and adaptation. What they got was poster papers and discussions on how society could be returned to groups of localised hunter-gatherers. The event goings on weren't publicised widely but there was limited coverage.
I think the earth supported about ten million people following a hunter gatherer lifestyle, so the vast majority of people living today will have a rather unfortunate end if the likes of XR get their way. cossy400 said:
Spare tyre said:
Might have been discussed already, but did you all see the hs2 protests at Asheville aggregates
Truly bizzare
Came to post thisTruly bizzare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBVhwIF_qzU&t=...
8 mins in ish
Blaming him for delivering stone to HS2, and asking for the Black man to come to the gate.
ATG said:
dandarez said:
We really have gone to 'pot'! What with the post office scandal and this.
I note that shower of numbskulls are nearly all from Stroud in Glos. Home of potty Gail Bradbrook, one of the founders of XR.
IMO (and others) she's a utter anarchist crackpot - literally.
Her own words:
"I’d been trying to start a campaign of mass civil disobedience for years before Extinction Rebellion."
Have a read...
http://www.whatisemerging.com/opinions/psychedelic...
Bottom line is she and all those behind the facade are simply 'anarchists'.
They really, really don't give a s
t about the climate. At all.Their 'aim' is something very, very different.
And yet the gullible and the thick follow in their droves.
I met plenty of hippies in the 60s, virtually to a person all were harmless, except to themselves.
The new version are f dangerous!
Decisions like above should worry the st out of 'normal' citizens.
Glad I'm old. The best was back then, the worst it seems is to come.
Hold on to your seat!
If you'd actually met any XR people you'd know that it is absurd to suggest they're all "just anarchists" or are gullible plonkers who've been hoodwinked by a bunch of anarchists. Obviously some of them are a fully fledged tie died hippies (and we need no more evidence than that they live in Stroud, home of the hemp and spelt flapjack), but equally plenty of them choose to use soap and are otherwise perfectly normal, thoughtful, educated, responsible citizens. My view is that they are playing a dangerous but surprisingly effective game with their campaign of pretty mild civil disobedience. I expected there to have been much more of a backlash against them than there has been. In fact they seem to have met with a surprising degree of support.I note that shower of numbskulls are nearly all from Stroud in Glos. Home of potty Gail Bradbrook, one of the founders of XR.
IMO (and others) she's a utter anarchist crackpot - literally.
Her own words:
"I’d been trying to start a campaign of mass civil disobedience for years before Extinction Rebellion."
Have a read...
http://www.whatisemerging.com/opinions/psychedelic...
Bottom line is she and all those behind the facade are simply 'anarchists'.
They really, really don't give a s
t about the climate. At all.Their 'aim' is something very, very different.And yet the gullible and the thick follow in their droves.
I met plenty of hippies in the 60s, virtually to a person all were harmless, except to themselves.
The new version are f dangerous!
Decisions like above should worry the s
t out of 'normal' citizens.Glad I'm old. The best was back then, the worst it seems is to come.
Hold on to your seat!
Edited by dandarez on Friday 23 April 22:54
An example of how they are in fact rather mainstream; they held a hustings earlier this evening for the up-coming Senedd elections. How anarchistic is that??!? Participating in the parliamentary democratic process; clear evidence of trying to overthrow the system.
Unsurprisingly the Tory candidate refused the invite on the basis of being incompatible with democracy blah blah blah ... vacuous, pompous, cowardly, tone-deaf, etc. All the other parties accepted and participated in a high quality, good-natured discussion. If you're not prepared to turn up and say "I don't think criminal damage is acceptable" you're just spineless. The other parties' candidates managed to do this; why couldn't the Conservatives? If someone is genuinely concerned that groups like XR are undermining the political process, why not engage with them when they're clearly open to that engagement?
I've better things to do with my life at my age. As for thoughtful, educated, responsible citizens, that doesn't prevent them being gullible as f
k does it? Who in their right mind would think nutty Gail shattering (or attempting to) bank glass windows would achieve anything, let alone a following, especially of educated, responsible citizens eh? I note you mention Wales re the elections - you're in bloody good company there with 'the' Welsh anarchist himself, 54 yr old Roger Hallam, the founder of XR along with nutty Gail.
Here is nutty 'normal' Gail again on the latest XR crap site.
https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2021/03/30/breaking...
BabySharkDooDooDooDooDooDoo said:
cossy400 said:
Spare tyre said:
Might have been discussed already, but did you all see the hs2 protests at Asheville aggregates
Truly bizzare
Came to post thisTruly bizzare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBVhwIF_qzU&t=...
8 mins in ish
Blaming him for delivering stone to HS2, and asking for the Black man to come to the gate.
I regualarly watch his weekly update and hes enough s
t on with the neighbours hes got wanting him shut down etc. cossy400 said:
BabySharkDooDooDooDooDooDoo said:
cossy400 said:
Spare tyre said:
Might have been discussed already, but did you all see the hs2 protests at Asheville aggregates
Truly bizzare
Came to post thisTruly bizzare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBVhwIF_qzU&t=...
8 mins in ish
Blaming him for delivering stone to HS2, and asking for the Black man to come to the gate.
I regualarly watch his weekly update and hes enough s
t on with the neighbours hes got wanting him shut down etc. ATG said:
techguyone said:
Ian Geary said:
Terzo123 said:
techguyone said:
This is getting a bit worrying, looks like Wokism has hit Juries now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56853...
Beggers belief.
Astonishing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56853...
Beggers belief.
Obviously they did a credible job laying on the green wash, but perhaps the UK will need to follow the USA and start selecting juries more carefully.
If one of you had been on the jury and sat through the trial in person, perhaps you'd have drawn the same conclusion too?
The precedent set here is that, if a group of people fundamentally disagree with what an organisation is doing, it's legally justifiable for it to vandalise that organisation's buildings. The jurors may well think XR is justified in vandalising the Shell building, but the law can't pick and choose which opinions and values are legal and which aren't. It's only supposed to set a limit on acceptable actions in order to keep the peace. According to this verdict, I can now go and smash the windows and spray paint the frontage of the local cafe that allows XR campaigners to hold meetings there, because I don't like what the people occupying that building stand for. Then they can vandalise my house in return until we descent into a total anarchy of tit-for-tat attacks.
Edited by Blakewater on Monday 26th April 19:45
You may have a point.
At the moment XRs' actions are sufferable and can be accommodated,sure there is some disruption for a few people and low level criminal damage is not really that much cost wise in the great scheme of things.
The danger is if they feel they can get away with their current state of disruption that they may ramp it up to a level which could result in death because of their increasing need to 'get their message across' only then will they be looked upon as a serious threat to the rest of society.
At the moment XRs' actions are sufferable and can be accommodated,sure there is some disruption for a few people and low level criminal damage is not really that much cost wise in the great scheme of things.
The danger is if they feel they can get away with their current state of disruption that they may ramp it up to a level which could result in death because of their increasing need to 'get their message across' only then will they be looked upon as a serious threat to the rest of society.
Blakewater said:
What's the difference between this and a crowd of protestors vandalising an abortion clinic or a mosque because they don't like what the people inside are doing or thinking?
The precedent set here is that, if a group of people fundamentally disagree with what an organisation is doing, it's legally justifiable for it to vandalise that organisation's buildings. The jurors may well think XR is justified in vandalising the Shell building, but the law can't pick and choose which opinions and values are legal and which aren't. It's only supposed to set a limit on acceptable actions in order to keep the peace. According to this verdict, I can now go and smash the windows and spray paint the frontage of the local cafe that allows XR campaigners to hold meetings there because I don't like what the people occupying that building stand for. Then they can vandalise my house in return until we descent into a total anarchy of tit-for-tat attacks.
Of course the law can pick and chose which opinions and values are legal. Saving the world is to be applauded, encouraged even. The precedent set here is that, if a group of people fundamentally disagree with what an organisation is doing, it's legally justifiable for it to vandalise that organisation's buildings. The jurors may well think XR is justified in vandalising the Shell building, but the law can't pick and choose which opinions and values are legal and which aren't. It's only supposed to set a limit on acceptable actions in order to keep the peace. According to this verdict, I can now go and smash the windows and spray paint the frontage of the local cafe that allows XR campaigners to hold meetings there because I don't like what the people occupying that building stand for. Then they can vandalise my house in return until we descent into a total anarchy of tit-for-tat attacks.
cossy400 said:
edited for my language: 'what an awful situation'.somewhere, there is a fee-paying public school factory churning out these people.
ATG said:
techguyone said:
Ian Geary said:
Terzo123 said:
techguyone said:
This is getting a bit worrying, looks like Wokism has hit Juries now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56853...
Beggers belief.
Astonishing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56853...
Beggers belief.
Obviously they did a credible job laying on the green wash, but perhaps the UK will need to follow the USA and start selecting juries more carefully.
If one of you had been on the jury and sat through the trial in person, perhaps you'd have drawn the same conclusion too?
People are triggered on here because it's extinction rebellion the same people no doubt that have been on the covid threads ranting about the loss of freedom and democracy and living in a "police state" calling for demonstrations etc...
The jury heard the arguments in court and made a decision and I trust them to have made the right one based upon what was presented.
Wills2 said:
Exactly, I'm glad we have a system that gives jurors "the people" the power to decide, others seem to want a totalitarian state when it suits them, but as we have witnessed over the last 12 months that's the last thing we need, with the police harassing people going about their lawful business being bundled forcibly into the back of Police cars etc...what's in your shopping bag sonny?
People are triggered on here because it's extinction rebellion the same people no doubt that have been on the covid threads ranting about the loss of freedom and democracy and living in a "police state" calling for demonstrations etc...
The jury heard the arguments in court and made a decision and I trust them to have made the right one based upon what was presented.
We're all just a bit surprised, it was criminal damage in law, bang to rights as they say.People are triggered on here because it's extinction rebellion the same people no doubt that have been on the covid threads ranting about the loss of freedom and democracy and living in a "police state" calling for demonstrations etc...
The jury heard the arguments in court and made a decision and I trust them to have made the right one based upon what was presented.
Can a large enough activist group now influence the law?
techguyone said:
This is getting a bit worrying, looks like Wokism has hit Juries now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56853...
Beggers belief.
I agree.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56853...
Beggers belief.
Protesting for your beliefs is one thing but criminal damage and vandalism is another.
The worrying thing is that they have now set a legal precedent.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff