Share this post:
The UK government has crossed a dangerous line.
For the first time in British history, a non-violent civil disobedience group has been banned as a terrorist organisation.
This was not for plotting attacks, not for harming people, but for throwing paint and damaging property during protests against Britain’s arms trade with Israel.
As of this weekend (July 5-6, 2025), supporting or associating with Palestine Action is punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Wearing a badge, organising a meeting, or even publicly expressing support could now land people behind bars — all under the same legislation used to prosecute Al-Qaida, ISIS, and neo-Nazi terror groups.
This is not security.
This is political censorship.
A new low in the criminalisation of protest
The ban came after Palestine Action activists damaged aircraft at RAF Brize Norton, claiming the base was complicit in arms transfers to Israel.
The government responded not with charges for criminal damage — which would be lawful and proportionate — but by proscribing the entire organisation under the Terrorism Act 2000.
In court, lawyers for Palestine Action argued the move was an “authoritarian abuse of power,” pointing out that the group does not advocate violence and that its tactics — while disruptive — have never endangered life.
Yet High Court Judge Mr Justice Chamberlain denied their request to suspend the ban, stating that public interest in maintaining the proscription outweighed the potential harm to civil liberties.
UN condemns UK government’s overreach
This decision has been condemned in stark terms by United Nations human rights experts, who issued a clear warning:
“Acts of protest that damage property, but are not intended to kill or injure people, should not be treated as terrorism… Using terrorism legislation against protesters undermines freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.”
The UN also expressed alarm over the broad powers granted by the ban, which would criminalise people not for their actions, but for mere association — wearing a T-shirt, hosting a discussion, or tweeting in support of the group.
Protecting arms dealers, not the public
What makes this even more disturbing is the political context.
Palestine Action’s primary target is Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer, which has multiple sites across the UK and supplies equipment to the Israeli military.
The group’s protests have focused on disrupting arms supply chains and calling attention to Britain’s complicity in Israel’s war on Gaza.
That complicity is not in dispute: the UK government continues to license weapons exports to Israel, despite overwhelming evidence of war crimes, including the killing of aid workers, medics, journalists, and tens of thousands of civilians.
And yet it is not Israel’s military — or the arms companies fuelling the carnage — that face legal scrutiny.
It is those protesting it.
A dangerous precedent
If spraying paint, locking onto factory gates, or damaging a runway can now be defined as terrorism, the term loses all meaning.
This sets a chilling precedent that could see climate activists, anti-arms trade campaigners, or any disruptive protest group labelled as “terrorists” simply because they embarrass those in power.
What we are seeing is not counter-terrorism.
It is the criminalisation of dissent.
It is no coincidence that this move comes under a Labour government led by Keir Starmer, whose leadership has purged pro-Palestine voices, abandoned calls for a ceasefire in Gaza for months, and consistently aligned with the Israeli state.
His Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, described Palestine Action’s protest as “disgraceful” — while offering no such condemnation for the killing of thousands in Gaza.
The birth of “Yvette Cooper” (the group)
In response to the ban, a new activist collective has reportedly emerged — mockingly calling themselves “Yvette Cooper” — to highlight the absurdity of proscribing a name rather than addressing the underlying political issue.
If Starmer’s ministers wants to keep banning Palestine solidarity actions, they may have to declare themselves illegal next.
We must reject this
To be clear: vandalism is a crime.
Civil disobedience is disruptive by design.
But neither should be treated as terrorism.
That distinction matters — not just for Palestine Action, but for every activist movement, present and future.
By abusing anti-terror legislation to silence protest, the Labour government threatens our most basic democratic rights.
We should all be deeply concerned — and we must speak out before speaking out becomes a crime.
Share this post:
Palestine Action branded ‘terrorists’ for spray paint and sit-ins in Labour’s war on protest
Share this post:
The UK government has crossed a dangerous line.
For the first time in British history, a non-violent civil disobedience group has been banned as a terrorist organisation.
This was not for plotting attacks, not for harming people, but for throwing paint and damaging property during protests against Britain’s arms trade with Israel.
As of this weekend (July 5-6, 2025), supporting or associating with Palestine Action is punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Wearing a badge, organising a meeting, or even publicly expressing support could now land people behind bars — all under the same legislation used to prosecute Al-Qaida, ISIS, and neo-Nazi terror groups.
This is not security.
This is political censorship.
A new low in the criminalisation of protest
The ban came after Palestine Action activists damaged aircraft at RAF Brize Norton, claiming the base was complicit in arms transfers to Israel.
The government responded not with charges for criminal damage — which would be lawful and proportionate — but by proscribing the entire organisation under the Terrorism Act 2000.
In court, lawyers for Palestine Action argued the move was an “authoritarian abuse of power,” pointing out that the group does not advocate violence and that its tactics — while disruptive — have never endangered life.
Yet High Court Judge Mr Justice Chamberlain denied their request to suspend the ban, stating that public interest in maintaining the proscription outweighed the potential harm to civil liberties.
UN condemns UK government’s overreach
This decision has been condemned in stark terms by United Nations human rights experts, who issued a clear warning:
The UN also expressed alarm over the broad powers granted by the ban, which would criminalise people not for their actions, but for mere association — wearing a T-shirt, hosting a discussion, or tweeting in support of the group.
Protecting arms dealers, not the public
What makes this even more disturbing is the political context.
Palestine Action’s primary target is Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer, which has multiple sites across the UK and supplies equipment to the Israeli military.
The group’s protests have focused on disrupting arms supply chains and calling attention to Britain’s complicity in Israel’s war on Gaza.
That complicity is not in dispute: the UK government continues to license weapons exports to Israel, despite overwhelming evidence of war crimes, including the killing of aid workers, medics, journalists, and tens of thousands of civilians.
And yet it is not Israel’s military — or the arms companies fuelling the carnage — that face legal scrutiny.
It is those protesting it.
A dangerous precedent
If spraying paint, locking onto factory gates, or damaging a runway can now be defined as terrorism, the term loses all meaning.
This sets a chilling precedent that could see climate activists, anti-arms trade campaigners, or any disruptive protest group labelled as “terrorists” simply because they embarrass those in power.
What we are seeing is not counter-terrorism.
It is the criminalisation of dissent.
It is no coincidence that this move comes under a Labour government led by Keir Starmer, whose leadership has purged pro-Palestine voices, abandoned calls for a ceasefire in Gaza for months, and consistently aligned with the Israeli state.
His Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, described Palestine Action’s protest as “disgraceful” — while offering no such condemnation for the killing of thousands in Gaza.
The birth of “Yvette Cooper” (the group)
In response to the ban, a new activist collective has reportedly emerged — mockingly calling themselves “Yvette Cooper” — to highlight the absurdity of proscribing a name rather than addressing the underlying political issue.
If Starmer’s ministers wants to keep banning Palestine solidarity actions, they may have to declare themselves illegal next.
We must reject this
To be clear: vandalism is a crime.
Civil disobedience is disruptive by design.
But neither should be treated as terrorism.
That distinction matters — not just for Palestine Action, but for every activist movement, present and future.
By abusing anti-terror legislation to silence protest, the Labour government threatens our most basic democratic rights.
We should all be deeply concerned — and we must speak out before speaking out becomes a crime.
Share this post:
you might also like
Police State Britain: Tories would arrest you for looking at them in a funny way
The Tory Euro threat exposed
Will you give British sovereignty to a foreign business?