No, damaging property doesn’t amount to terrorism. What world do you live in?
What most people understand as terrorism is the spreading of terror in the general population. Last time I checked, no one felt terrorized because some planes got spray painted.
Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Yes it does. In the UK, terrorism is defined more broadly, and the actions of this groups fall firmly within their legal definitions, hence why they were so swift with this designation.
justice.org.uk/counter-terrorism-human-rights/
MrKurteous@feddit.nu 1 week ago
You sure seem to be right about the broader definition! But legal or not, it still seems absolutely crazy to classify this type of property damage as terrorism to me… I have a hard time to see how to justify that beyond, of course, the technicalities of the definition in the UK
Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I think it has less to do with the property damage and more to do with the implications of the incident and the intent behind it.
You have a group of people who premeditated a plan to sneak into a highly secured RAF airbase without proper authorization with the intention to damage military equipment owned by the state. This is a major breach of national security, it is an act of sabotage, and it causes direct harm to the British state as it’s a direct attempt to undermine the country’s military capabilities for political purposes.
That’s very good grounds to label the organization responsible as terrorist group. Keep in mind, agreeing or disagreeing with the cause of the activists is irrelevant here. You have to think about things from the point of the view of the state. If an attack like this doesn’t get properly punished, then what kind of precedent would that set? Does any self righteous group get a free pass to damage public property and undermine national security? The state cannot allow such avenues of instability to take hold. A red line has to be firmly set, and those who cross it have to face consquences.
MrKurteous@feddit.nu 1 week ago
Oh trust me, I get that the state wants to punish this and set a red line, no doubt about that. That doesn’t make the label of terrorist appropriate, there is plenty of things other than terrorism that are illegal. My idea of terrorism doesn’t include this form of property damage, and labeling it as such seems to be what sets a dangerous precedent here.
oo1@lemmings.world 1 week ago
military target not civilians.
Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 1 week ago
The UK isn’t at war dingus.
febra@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Then you might have a tyrannical government. In that case, definitions should be the least of your concerns.
Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 1 week ago
There’s literally nothing tyrannical about this situation.
On one hand, you have a democratic country, the UK, that has voted in a set of well defined laws that clearly outline what terrorism means, what can be considered as terrorism, and what the consequences are for terrorist acts. These legal parameters have been established law for decades.
On the other hand, you have an activist group, Palestinian Action, that knowing and intentionally chose to violate these laws by illegally sneaking into an RAF base and intentionally damaging military equipment for political purposes.
Considering how this is a malicious act of sabotage, a breach of national security, and an attempt to undermine the British state, this organization fits the criteria to be designated as a terrorist group. Because of this British politicians, quickly employed the established terrorism laws to give them the designation. Not only because what they did is considered terrorism in the country, but also because they don’t want to set a precedent that this type of action gets a pass. They wanted to make it clear that such actions are an unacceptable red line, and those who cross will be swiftly punished.
So in essence. There were laws established democratically, a group intentionally violated them, and they’re now facing the consequences of doing so. The UK is not censoring their activism cause, they’re going after other groups that didn’t do anything wrong, and this group is not being punished over any free speech grounds. Calling this tyranny is ignorance.
febra@lemmy.world 1 week ago
The Nazis also came to power democratically. The US regime is also hunting down immigrants in a gestapo like fashion democratically. Just because something is a law doesn’t mean anything.