zlacker

[return to "Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England"]
1. Shank+Bj[view] [source] 2025-08-13 13:23:41
>>amarch+(OP)
The UK is quickly deploying surveillance state technology that people once decried China for. Whether or not this is ethical or useful, I wish the hypocrisy would be acknowledged. The OSA, the Apple encryption demands, LFR, …, it’s clearly a trend. Has society really become this dangerous that we must deploy these things?
◧◩
2. elric+Zo[view] [source] 2025-08-13 13:51:59
>>Shank+Bj
They've been doing this for years at protests, using "Forward Intelligence Teams". Even back in 2010 [1] there was an action group trying to protest this growing police-state (Fitwatch). The UK has had an insane number of CCTV cameras for as long as I can remember.

Must be a truly dangerous place...

https://web.archive.org/web/20100824175032/http://fitwatch.o...

◧◩◪
3. orra+rS[view] [source] 2025-08-13 16:07:36
>>elric+Zo
> Must be a truly dangerous place...

I don't know if you're awaee, but the number of arrests for terrorism has skyrocketed in recent months, in the UK.

Sounds terrifying, until you realise people were arrested as terrorists for holding placards. (That fact is of course terrifying, but in a chilling way).

◧◩◪◨
4. kypro+7a2[view] [source] 2025-08-13 23:45:20
>>orra+rS
You forgot to mention those people are holding placards in support of an illegal "terror" group whose objective is to protest the unnecessary human loss of life in Palestine by spray painting British military equipment.

Obligatory legal notice that I obviously do not support said group, but historically terrorists would actually need to commit acts that instil a sense terror in people to further their political objectives. N one I've spoken to feels even remotely terrorised by Palestine Action, and it wouldn't even make sense to be given what they stand for.

I say this as someone who neither supports Palestine Action or shares their concerns.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. arrows+7i3[view] [source] 2025-08-14 12:23:50
>>kypro+7a2
Palestine Action broke into a British military base and sabotaged millions of pounds' worth of equipment. What did you expect the government to do exactly — shrug it off? What kind of message would that have sent?

The Terrorism Act 2000 gives "serious damage to property" as one definition of terrorism so I find it hard to argue that the government was doing anything more than neutrally applying the law here. Those protestors knew full well they were supporting a proscribed group and they were warned what the consequences would be. Protesting in support of Palestine remains entirely legal in the UK just as long as you don't use the name and branding of this one specific group.

I'll probably regret posting this but there are some extremely disingenuous half-truths in this thread and I think that readers should know the full context.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. imposs+vn3[view] [source] 2025-08-14 13:04:48
>>arrows+7i3
Personally I expected prosecutions for sabotage rather than for terrorism.

The UK has very broad terrorism legislation, but conventionally terrorism is something directed at civilians, and it's not something we usually tar, for example, resistance groups with.

I think you even have to be able to kill people in internal political conflict without being called a terrorist. There are many circumstances during which such things are necessary.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. arrows+Fq3[view] [source] 2025-08-14 13:23:47
>>imposs+vn3
FWIW the specific activists who entered the base were charged with "conspiracy to commit criminal damage" and "conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the UK", not terrorism. [0]

[0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3dp5158720o

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. imposs+9t3[view] [source] 2025-08-14 13:39:46
>>arrows+Fq3
Yes, but then the organization was proscribed as a terrorist organization.
[go to top]