66
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
66 points (98.5% liked)
United Kingdom
6701 readers
354 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Elbit Systems have a weapons factory, also in Bristol, which was the site of a break-in by direct action activists who found quadcopter drones used to drop grenades on people in Gaza. The activists were imprisoned without trial.
Direct action like that in the video risks huge personal sacrifice.
How is this legal
Laws no longer apply when israel is involved unfortunatly
It's called being "held on remand" when they think someone is so dangerous that they have to be in prison until their trial. If that person gets found not guilty they occasionally get a "whoops, sorry" but I wouldn't bet on it
To be clear, they broke into a factory and attacked someone with a hammer that they took with them for that purpose.
Then they publicly stated that they would do it again as soon as they got the chance. It's that later statement which is why they had to be kept behind bars.
They had the option to apologise, say things got out of control and agree to bail conditions but they refused to do that so they are in prison by their own choice.
It would be negligent of the justice system to do nothing and release them to find another victim. They have since been tried and found guilty.
Just to be clear, the protestors were not using a hammer, but the person they attacked was attempting to brutalise them with a hammer, so its actually better to describe the situation as:
Protestors defend themselves when a police officer attacked them with a hammer.
Your wording is very weaselly.
Evidence says otherwise: BBC News - Police officer unable to dress after Palestine Action hammer attack - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g54g1r15eo?app-referrer=deep-link
I love your evidence is from before the trial, when the video showed in court finally showed it was the other way around and the police officer lied as the police always do.
Really? Here's something from after the trial where Corner was found guilty of GBH (his 32nd conviction)BBC News - Palestine Action activists guilty of Elbit Systems site raid - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2p99rxr5po?app-referrer=search
They put forward that defence in trial but the video obviously doesn't back up their turn of events, because the victim wasn't holding a hammer.
I suppose you will believe whatever suits your narrative but I prefer to base my opinion on actual facts.
A police officers statement is not a fact, and historically has always been a distortion to maximise victimisation of their institution and ensure they can inflict violence on the vulnerable.
Taking the narrative of a police officer positions you are very naive.
Then perhaps base your opinion on what was said by the protestors themselves who stated in court that they were not in fact attacked with a hammer as you say.
Isn't the more likely explanation that a violent thug gave a weak excuse for battering a woman and that excuse didn't hold up to the slightest scrutiny?
Because it isn't true.
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/local-news/palestine-action-activists-found-guilty-10950923
The facts of the case are being deliberately obscured to further agendas rather than promoting the truth.
They've been in prison until this point. That's nearly two years in prison without having been found guilty in a trial. The maximum is supposed to be six months.
To be clear, they broke into a factory and attacked someone with a hammer that they took with them for that purpose.
Then they publicly stated that they would do it again as soon as they got the chance. It's that later statement which is why they had to be kept behind bars.
They had the option to apologise, say things got out of control and agree to bail conditions but they refused to do that so they are in prison by their own choice.
It would be negligent of the justice system to do nothing release them to find another victim.
There is a legal limit of 182 days to hold someone in custody, which is there for obvious and important reasons.
I'm well aware of the CTL and also that it can be extended in certain circumstances, as it was in this case. It even says this is possible in the link you provided.
There is recourse in law (again in the link you provided) to seek a review if you feel CTL is unjustly extended but it's interesting that the people who were subsequently found guilty of their crimes didn't seek a review when they could have done so.
You might conclude that the people who commited these crimes had the conviction in there beliefs to do it but not quite enough belief to actually accept the consequences of breaking the law. That's pretty pathetic isn't it?
Thank you