zlacker

>>DamonH+(OP)
After seeing NUMEROUS video of UK police showing up at doorsteps like the gestapo, arresting or citing or intimidating people who are simply practicing free speech, I don’t think anyone should support the government with a pathway to de-anonymize the web. Even if you support the current government, such powers will be used against you at some point.

>>Silver+02
If you're looking for evidence of the UK gov's authoritarian tendencies, you don't need to go looking at videos on Youtube, just look at the number of arrests of peaceful protestors who were given charges under terrorism legislation for holding up banners or wearing T-Shirts mentioning "Palestine Action" (ref https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/sep/25/fate-of-hund...).

Or indeed in one notable case the person who was arrested for a T-Shirt about "Plasticine action"

>>raesen+z8
They're supporting a specific group that went into a military base and damaged military equipment (that was irrelevant to palestine/israel), those people going out with those T-Shirts know exactly why the group was proscribed and are seeking to be arrested, why are we shocked they got arrested, they wanted it.

>>Chocol+A9
Put it this way, the UK managed to get through the troubles, which had a lot of events far more serious than what Palestine action have done, without needing this level of policing of free speech.

The point I was making is that successive UK gov's are tending towards authoritarianism, the current one included.

>>raesen+0c
If you're trying to convince Brits not to enact these policies "you guys made it through The Troubles" is a really bad argument unless you're very unfamiliar with the body count and terror and the public perception of that period in British history. (it included some fifty thousand casualties and sixteen thousand bombings)

An advocate of these policies would quite literally argue that not getting into something like The Troubles is the point and a lot of people would agree if that was what is on the horizon.