Extinction Rebellion - Are They Terrorists Yet?
Discussion
peterperkins said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Do they fulfil the legal definition of terrorists? I have no idea.
But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
Sensible post above. I'm an old fart who likes cars and people burnt at the state for looking at me in a funny way. But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
However speaking to much younger people I know this is def what they are thinking..
They are putting the blame fairly on the shoulders of those who came before and have f
ked it up.. i.e. us.. Back in 2004 the Schools Travel Plan Officer at Stockton On Tees Borough Council said:
Our aim is to brainwash a new generation.
The thread title poses an apt question: any group that's aiming to undermine the social and economic fabric of a country including via unlawful disruption of transport networks is participating in terrorism, the fact that this lot are hiding behind the environment in the latest attempt to overthrow capitalism by undemocratic means is by the by.peterperkins said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Do they fulfil the legal definition of terrorists? I have no idea.
But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
Sensible post above. I'm an old fart who likes cars and people burnt at the state for looking at me in a funny way. But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
However speaking to much younger people I know this is def what they are thinking..
They are putting the blame fairly on the shoulders of those who came before and have f
ked it up.. i.e. us.. A brief note based on old fashioned data and research: the ratio of primary energy use to GDP has long been known to exhibit a time trend shaped like an upside-down U such that energy per unit GDP first rises then falls as economic development progresses (e.g. Pearce and Palmer's paper in Fiscal Studies). As well as technological changes that improve energy efficiency, spending on environmental protection increases. Economic development and reductions in poverty produce a rising demand for environmental quality and environmental protection. There's no need for terrorism (!) aiming to crash capitalism and de-industrialise in order to protect the environment. Economic development is beneficial to us and the environment at this point.
An example follows from a different era of media reporting standards on this topic. Even so it doesn't explicitly mention biodiversity benefits found in the University of Surrey study.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1159732.stm
An example follows from a different era of media reporting standards on this topic. Even so it doesn't explicitly mention biodiversity benefits found in the University of Surrey study.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1159732.stm
Gameface said:
Randy Winkman said:
Gameface said:
I've not paid much attention to them, but when they 'set up camp' somewhere in a public place, do they tidy up after themselves and leave the area as they found it?
Genuine question.
When they are being dragged away by the police I don't think they get to say "Can I just collect my things?"Genuine question.
There have been a few media reports showing rubbish everywhere and a diesel generator being used, but these were later shown to be false.
The picture of Hyde Park covered in rubbish was from a legalise pot rally and the diesel generator was a petrol one being used in Germany.
Putting the legal definition aside I'm not sure I feel particularly terrorised by these people.
Witnessing masked assailants take carving knives to people on a night out, or seeing a vehicle mow down people on a bridge would terrorise me, i.e. I would feel fear and terror. Watching a load of people gluing themselves to building/trucks/bridges/each other, meaning I might be a little bit late for something, doesn't fill me with terror.
Witnessing masked assailants take carving knives to people on a night out, or seeing a vehicle mow down people on a bridge would terrorise me, i.e. I would feel fear and terror. Watching a load of people gluing themselves to building/trucks/bridges/each other, meaning I might be a little bit late for something, doesn't fill me with terror.
turbobloke said:
peterperkins said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Do they fulfil the legal definition of terrorists? I have no idea.
But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
Sensible post above. I'm an old fart who likes cars and people burnt at the state for looking at me in a funny way. But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
However speaking to much younger people I know this is def what they are thinking..
They are putting the blame fairly on the shoulders of those who came before and have f
ked it up.. i.e. us.. Back in 2004 the Schools Travel Plan Officer at Stockton On Tees Borough Council said:
Our aim is to brainwash a new generation.
The thread title poses an apt question: any group that's aiming to undermine the social and economic fabric of a country including via unlawful disruption of transport networks is participating in terrorism, the fact that this lot are hiding behind the environment in the latest attempt to overthrow capitalism by undemocratic means is by the by.The gentleman in question is mentioned here - https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/local-news/cash...
RTB said:
Putting the legal definition aside I'm not sure I feel particularly terrorised by these people.
Witnessing masked assailants take carving knives to people on a night out, or seeing a vehicle mow down people on a bridge would terrorise me, i.e. I would feel fear and terror. Watching a load of people gluing themselves to building/trucks/bridges/each other, meaning I might be a little bit late for something, doesn't fill me with terror.
The trouble is, there can be confusion over the two.Witnessing masked assailants take carving knives to people on a night out, or seeing a vehicle mow down people on a bridge would terrorise me, i.e. I would feel fear and terror. Watching a load of people gluing themselves to building/trucks/bridges/each other, meaning I might be a little bit late for something, doesn't fill me with terror.
Depending what XR are doing with their protests it could set panic amongst people who may genuinely believe some extreme terrorist attack is going on which could then lead to injuries or even worse fatalities. I would say XR need to go very careful how they go about their protests. Being silly at Airports/On planes isn't a good idea.
XR are not terrorists - not in the way Greenpeace can sometimes be.
I'm 100% pro cleaning up the Environment, I honestly believe that all those who do not believe that human industrialisation and use of fossil fuels have accelerated climate change outside of the Natural cycle are ill-educated or buying into a bias and reinforcing it by gobbling up fake reports and news because they are selfish tts at heart. I'm confident that the ignorant will ultimately be forced to comply though through legislation and they can wail and scream all they like. I don't engage in the debates on the subject, it is no longer a debate for intelligent folk, the results are in, it is fact, only those with ulterior vested interests want to persuade otherwise and they can get stuffed. 
That said, I don't agree with the methods XR are engaging in but I accept that so long as they are peaceful, they have a right to protest. Still, I am a strong proponent for Protest without disruption.
I think Greta is over the top, I support her message but her emotional outrage is not going to sway those who need swaying. She has, however, achieved more than anyone on these Forums or in most places in terms of making herself heard and getting attention for her Cause. I just think if she was able to deliver her message in calmer fashion and stopped the blame game, focussed upon what needs to be done only, she might hit home with more of those she needs to be persuading. Immaturity and ill-advisement aren't allowing that, sadly.
XR, like most Causes that attract a largely uncontrolled Membership does have its less desirable fringe, of course. Those who will take matters too far in their euphoric glaze for their perceived peer adoration. These elements are the ones who can be violent or the most disruptive and they should be dealt with harshly by the Law.
The vast majority are still peaceful protesters and so as an entity, we cannot call XR a terrorist group. The central message is correct, albeit sometimes they are a tad extreme and don't help by going overboard with their demands - not exactly in sync with reality and what can be delivered.
I'm 100% pro cleaning up the Environment, I honestly believe that all those who do not believe that human industrialisation and use of fossil fuels have accelerated climate change outside of the Natural cycle are ill-educated or buying into a bias and reinforcing it by gobbling up fake reports and news because they are selfish t
ts at heart. I'm confident that the ignorant will ultimately be forced to comply though through legislation and they can wail and scream all they like. I don't engage in the debates on the subject, it is no longer a debate for intelligent folk, the results are in, it is fact, only those with ulterior vested interests want to persuade otherwise and they can get stuffed. That said, I don't agree with the methods XR are engaging in but I accept that so long as they are peaceful, they have a right to protest. Still, I am a strong proponent for Protest without disruption.
I think Greta is over the top, I support her message but her emotional outrage is not going to sway those who need swaying. She has, however, achieved more than anyone on these Forums or in most places in terms of making herself heard and getting attention for her Cause. I just think if she was able to deliver her message in calmer fashion and stopped the blame game, focussed upon what needs to be done only, she might hit home with more of those she needs to be persuading. Immaturity and ill-advisement aren't allowing that, sadly.
XR, like most Causes that attract a largely uncontrolled Membership does have its less desirable fringe, of course. Those who will take matters too far in their euphoric glaze for their perceived peer adoration. These elements are the ones who can be violent or the most disruptive and they should be dealt with harshly by the Law.
The vast majority are still peaceful protesters and so as an entity, we cannot call XR a terrorist group. The central message is correct, albeit sometimes they are a tad extreme and don't help by going overboard with their demands - not exactly in sync with reality and what can be delivered.
rscott said:
The quote from the Schools Travel Plan officer refers to persuading children to use sustainable travel methods to get to school - buses, walking, cycling, shared lifts, etc. I'd have thought that's something most of use would support?
The gentleman in question is mentioned here - https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/local-news/cash...
The gentleman in question is mentioned here - https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/local-news/cash...
It's proof of a socialist conspiracy to make us eat lentils.dandarez said:
RIght to protest?
Here's hoping they block your passage to work or your urgent need to get somewhere, eg hospital, next time, eh?
Just like those who 'work' also have the right to get there unhindered by these assholes.
Just like those who need to get to hospital have a 'right' to get there.
These sad dicks have, and are deliberately preventing this.
As for 'veterans' (nice choice of word).
They certainly have the right to protest. However, they do not have the right to block highways nor roads, deface monuments, nor superglue themselves to public buildings, places of people's work, or even the top of aircraft(!) nor prevent others from going about their right of way. Hence why the increasing number of arrests.
Only anarchists and the workshy do things like that.
Police have at last woken up in London, but are now stretched to the limit taking away valuable resource.
Ha ha. See their (XR) latest escapade was dancing around the Guildhall Booker Prize announcement tonight.
Looks like they've had an effect - joint winners (not allowed). The Booker chair of judges silly Peter Florence was told there could be only one winner, but said they were 'seized by the spirit of Extinction Rebellion protesters who circled the assembly, so we flouted the rules whereby there should be only one winner.'
Spirit of today, eh? fk the rules. Anything goes. Democracy, fk off. Protest where you like, when you like, how you like, if it fks up somebody's life, tough!
Sums it up, doesn't it?
Hmmm yes because a few people being late to get to work or any other place is a massive inconvenience isn't it . . . . you know compared to the trivial inconvenience that is climate change, crop failure, mass extinction, sea level rises, etc, etc, Here's hoping they block your passage to work or your urgent need to get somewhere, eg hospital, next time, eh?
Just like those who 'work' also have the right to get there unhindered by these assholes.
Just like those who need to get to hospital have a 'right' to get there.
These sad dicks have, and are deliberately preventing this.
As for 'veterans' (nice choice of word).
They certainly have the right to protest. However, they do not have the right to block highways nor roads, deface monuments, nor superglue themselves to public buildings, places of people's work, or even the top of aircraft(!) nor prevent others from going about their right of way. Hence why the increasing number of arrests.
Only anarchists and the workshy do things like that.
Police have at last woken up in London, but are now stretched to the limit taking away valuable resource.
Ha ha. See their (XR) latest escapade was dancing around the Guildhall Booker Prize announcement tonight.
Looks like they've had an effect - joint winners (not allowed). The Booker chair of judges silly Peter Florence was told there could be only one winner, but said they were 'seized by the spirit of Extinction Rebellion protesters who circled the assembly, so we flouted the rules whereby there should be only one winner.'
Spirit of today, eh? f
k the rules. Anything goes. Democracy, fk off. Protest where you like, when you like, how you like, if it fks up somebody's life, tough!Sums it up, doesn't it?
Still, if you really need to get there then perhaps take a different route to hospital avoiding the protest? Or walk/cycle? Not hard is it.
Diderot said:
The Mad Monk said:
TL:DR
Am I the first to ask:- "Don't these people have jobs to go to?"
Or is saving the planet more important than mundane stuff like putting food on the table?
Some of them are being paid to protest. Up to £400 per week. Rentamob. Am I the first to ask:- "Don't these people have jobs to go to?"
Or is saving the planet more important than mundane stuff like putting food on the table?
peterperkins said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Do they fulfil the legal definition of terrorists? I have no idea.
But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
Sensible post above. I'm an old fart who likes cars and people burnt at the state for looking at me in a funny way. But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
However speaking to much younger people I know this is def what they are thinking..
They are putting the blame fairly on the shoulders of those who came before and have f
ked it up.. i.e. us.. Are 'we' responsible for their obsession with tech, their use of man-made materials and the fact they are the most travelled generation in our history?
I have every respect for clog wearing, walking, lentil eating and canvas tent dwelling people.
Air travelling, car using, North face and Nike wearing, gfch dwelling people on the other hand - obnoxious hypocrites.
I've got no problem with them protesting, up to the point where they break the law, for example when they cause an obstruction.
The Mad Monk said:
TL:DR
Am I the first to ask:- "Don't these people have jobs to go to?"
Or is saving the planet more important than mundane stuff like putting food on the table?
Or as it was an organised ‘event’ they took time off from their jobs and instead of going to Benidorm, they’ve hit the streets instead? Am I the first to ask:- "Don't these people have jobs to go to?"
Or is saving the planet more important than mundane stuff like putting food on the table?
As for labelling them as terrorists, get a grip.
Bloody snowflakes
Coolbanana said:
XR are not terrorists - not in the way Greenpeace can sometimes be.
I'm 100% pro cleaning up the Environment, I honestly believe that all those who do not believe that human industrialisation and use of fossil fuels have accelerated climate change outside of the Natural cycle are ill-educated or buying into a bias and reinforcing it by gobbling up fake reports and news because they are selfish tts at heart. I'm confident that the ignorant will ultimately be forced to comply though through legislation and they can wail and scream all they like. I don't engage in the debates on the subject, it is no longer a debate for intelligent folk, the results are in, it is fact, only those with ulterior vested interests want to persuade otherwise and they can get stuffed.
That said, I don't agree with the methods XR are engaging in but I accept that so long as they are peaceful, they have a right to protest. Still, I am a strong proponent for Protest without disruption.
I think Greta is over the top, I support her message but her emotional outrage is not going to sway those who need swaying. She has, however, achieved more than anyone on these Forums or in most places in terms of making herself heard and getting attention for her Cause. I just think if she was able to deliver her message in calmer fashion and stopped the blame game, focussed upon what needs to be done only, she might hit home with more of those she needs to be persuading. Immaturity and ill-advisement aren't allowing that, sadly.
XR, like most Causes that attract a largely uncontrolled Membership does have its less desirable fringe, of course. Those who will take matters too far in their euphoric glaze for their perceived peer adoration. These elements are the ones who can be violent or the most disruptive and they should be dealt with harshly by the Law.
The vast majority are still peaceful protesters and so as an entity, we cannot call XR a terrorist group. The central message is correct, albeit sometimes they are a tad extreme and don't help by going overboard with their demands - not exactly in sync with reality and what can be delivered.
Bloody hell that is a really well written post. I'm 100% pro cleaning up the Environment, I honestly believe that all those who do not believe that human industrialisation and use of fossil fuels have accelerated climate change outside of the Natural cycle are ill-educated or buying into a bias and reinforcing it by gobbling up fake reports and news because they are selfish t
ts at heart. I'm confident that the ignorant will ultimately be forced to comply though through legislation and they can wail and scream all they like. I don't engage in the debates on the subject, it is no longer a debate for intelligent folk, the results are in, it is fact, only those with ulterior vested interests want to persuade otherwise and they can get stuffed. That said, I don't agree with the methods XR are engaging in but I accept that so long as they are peaceful, they have a right to protest. Still, I am a strong proponent for Protest without disruption.
I think Greta is over the top, I support her message but her emotional outrage is not going to sway those who need swaying. She has, however, achieved more than anyone on these Forums or in most places in terms of making herself heard and getting attention for her Cause. I just think if she was able to deliver her message in calmer fashion and stopped the blame game, focussed upon what needs to be done only, she might hit home with more of those she needs to be persuading. Immaturity and ill-advisement aren't allowing that, sadly.
XR, like most Causes that attract a largely uncontrolled Membership does have its less desirable fringe, of course. Those who will take matters too far in their euphoric glaze for their perceived peer adoration. These elements are the ones who can be violent or the most disruptive and they should be dealt with harshly by the Law.
The vast majority are still peaceful protesters and so as an entity, we cannot call XR a terrorist group. The central message is correct, albeit sometimes they are a tad extreme and don't help by going overboard with their demands - not exactly in sync with reality and what can be delivered.
It isn't a black and white issue, despite people being stereotyped as either head in the sand fake news gammons or bonkers, leftist, cabbage bothering eco nutters. But from what I've heard they are protesting in a peaceful and fairly respectful fashion. Stanley Johnson himself said that he was most impressed with this aspect of the demonstrations.
Diderot said:
peterperkins said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Do they fulfil the legal definition of terrorists? I have no idea.
But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
Sensible post above. I'm an old fart who likes cars and people burnt at the state for looking at me in a funny way. But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
However speaking to much younger people I know this is def what they are thinking..
They are putting the blame fairly on the shoulders of those who came before and have f
ked it up.. i.e. us.. 
The issue, like so many, has been over-simplified for the younger generation. They are told the older generation is entirely to blame, and hence it absolves them of any responsibility themselves, barring token "lifestyle change" gestures.
warch said:
Bloody hell that is a really well written post.
It isn't a black and white issue, despite people being stereotyped as either head in the sand fake news gammons or bonkers, leftist, cabbage bothering eco nutters. But from what I've heard they are protesting in a peaceful and fairly respectful fashion. Stanley Johnson himself said that he was most impressed with this aspect of the demonstrations.
What is black and white is environmental pollution. Although there are people who don't care about environmental pollution it is impossible to argue about plastic/oil/other contamination taking place.It isn't a black and white issue, despite people being stereotyped as either head in the sand fake news gammons or bonkers, leftist, cabbage bothering eco nutters. But from what I've heard they are protesting in a peaceful and fairly respectful fashion. Stanley Johnson himself said that he was most impressed with this aspect of the demonstrations.
What is not black and white is the human effect on climate change. Debate continues to rage around this issue.
This is why the militants like to conflate black and white with grey, often using the former to evidence the latter. It goes beyond militants and has now infected the bulk of the education system. MMGW is taught as fact alongside the discovery of plastic in whale stomachs.
This is producing a steady stream of well meaning but indoctrinated supporters of whom Greta Thunberg is the perfect poster girl.
peterperkins said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Do they fulfil the legal definition of terrorists? I have no idea.
But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
Sensible post above. I'm an old fart who likes cars and people burnt at the state for looking at me in a funny way. But what I do know is that posters on PH and the general public are massively underestimating how the younger generations feel about the environment.
I appreciate XR are a mix of age groups, but speaking more generally, environmental issues are a huge issue for the young, and I think people are going to get a surprise if they assume ‘Environmentalism’ will not change their lifestyles much in the next 10-20 years.
However speaking to much younger people I know this is def what they are thinking..
They are putting the blame fairly on the shoulders of those who came before and have f
ked it up.. i.e. us.. The number of people who blame and protest but don't live as they preach far outnumber the ones who actualy change their habits.
If the next generation want change then come up with a practical solution or learn to live without modern conveniences. Stopping traffic for a few hours will solve f
k all.The most annoying thing is the fact that they care about the environment so much but have no idea of the scale of the problem. Its not like getting on a bus and going vegan solves the problem. The problem requires a complete overhaul of the entire way we go about extracting and using energy. Nothing we have come up with is without SERIOUS shortfalls with some solutions being complete frauds. Shouting and raving about it does nothing but hinder. I mean you trace the problem and it literally all comes down to us being completely and utterly reliant on oil. If someone solves that problem then fair enough and it will be a serious technological breakthrough if it ever happens. I don't think these protests add anything to the cause and probably detract because everyone is now pissed off with them. False outrage to be pc and fit in with peers I think is the real motive.
Edited by Michaelbailey on Tuesday 15th October 10:14
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff