Climate activist Greta Thunberg found herself in the custody of Dutch police during a demonstration in The Hague, where she joined hundreds of activists calling for climate action. The detention occurred after Thunberg, along with around 100 protesters, attempted to block a major highway leading into the city as part of the Extinction Rebellion campaign.

 

The A12 highway, a focal point for activists demanding an end to fossil fuel subsidies, has been a site of repeated protests in recent months. Despite a heavy police presence initially preventing activists from accessing the road, some managed to sit down on another route and were subsequently detained after disregarding police orders to disperse.

 

Thunberg, known for her unwavering climate advocacy, was escorted onto a police bus alongside other demonstrators. Despite the circumstances, she was seen flashing a victory sign as the bus departed the scene. The Extinction Rebellion campaign group had announced plans to block the main highway into The Hague as part of their ongoing efforts to raise awareness about climate change.

 

This incident adds to Thunberg's history of civil disobedience in pursuit of climate action. In February, she was acquitted by a London court after refusing to follow a police order to leave a protest outside an oil and gas industry conference. Thunberg's activism, which began with solitary protests outside the Swedish parliament in 2018, has since inspired a global youth movement demanding urgent action to address the climate crisis.

 

Despite facing fines in both Sweden and the UK for her activism, Thunberg remains resolute in her commitment to raising awareness about climate change and advocating for stronger measures to combat it.

 

07.04.24

Source

 

Is there any chance that irritating woman can be locked up for a long time? Sadly, probably not.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Is there any chance that irritating woman can be locked up for a long time? Sadly, probably not.

I donno I admire her passion and cause but she is annoying 😂 

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Is there any chance that irritating woman can be locked up for a long time? Sadly, probably not.

 

The UK government has introduced some very draconian laws limiting freedom to protest, and absolutely disproportionate sentencing for having the temerity to stand up against government and big business, so it is quite possible that if she falls foul of those laws in the UK in the future, she too could end up in jail for years for speaking the truth. 

 

Fears over right to protest after woman with sign at climate trial prosecuted

Civil liberty campaigners have warned that the prosecution of a woman for holding up a placard about the rights of jurors outside a court is part of the government’s increasing attacks on the right to protest.

19 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

The UK government has introduced some very draconian laws limiting freedom to protest, and absolutely disproportionate sentencing for having the temerity to stand up against government and big business, so it is quite possible that if she falls foul of those laws in the UK in the future, she too could end up in jail for years for speaking the truth. 

 

Fears over right to protest after woman with sign at climate trial prosecuted

Civil liberty campaigners have warned that the prosecution of a woman for holding up a placard about the rights of jurors outside a court is part of the government’s increasing attacks on the right to protest.

While I agree about the draconian laws concerning the right to protest ( has the UK government gone collectively insane? ) I disagree that any words coming out of Greta's mouth are the truth.

23 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

The UK government has introduced some very draconian laws limiting freedom to protest, and absolutely disproportionate sentencing for having the temerity to stand up against government and big business, so it is quite possible that if she falls foul of those laws in the UK in the future, she too could end up in jail for years for speaking the truth. 

 

Fears over right to protest after woman with sign at climate trial prosecuted

Civil liberty campaigners have warned that the prosecution of a woman for holding up a placard about the rights of jurors outside a court is part of the government’s increasing attacks on the right to protest.

 

   She was standing outside a Court trying to influence the Judges decision in a Court case . 

She was interfering with the justice system , jury knobbling as they call it . 

    Greeta and her mob get away with disruption and damaging things with little punishment in the UK

17 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   She was standing outside a Court trying to influence the Judges decision in a Court case . 

She was interfering with the justice system , jury knobbling as they call it . 

    Greeta and her mob get away with disruption and damaging things with little punishment in the UK

 

She was holding a sign which started a fact of law. Do you not think that it's important that jurors are made aware of the law? Would you prefer that they made decisions in ignorance?

56 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

The UK government has introduced some very draconian laws limiting freedom to protest, and absolutely disproportionate sentencing for having the temerity to stand up against government and big business, so it is quite possible that if she falls foul of those laws in the UK in the future, she too could end up in jail for years for speaking the truth. 

 

Fears over right to protest after woman with sign at climate trial prosecuted

Civil liberty campaigners have warned that the prosecution of a woman for holding up a placard about the rights of jurors outside a court is part of the government’s increasing attacks on the right to protest.

 

Let her go and protest in the biggest polluting countries and see how that goes. 

 

Edited April 7, 20242 yr by soi3eddie

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

She was holding a sign which started a fact of law. Do you not think that it's important that jurors are made aware of the law? Would you prefer that they made decisions in ignorance?

 

Any juror that assumes that a protesters sign accurately states the law should be disqualified for gross stupidity. The judge is the one that will instruct the jury on what the law is.

8 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

She was holding a sign which started a fact of law. Do you not think that it's important that jurors are made aware of the law? Would you prefer that they made decisions in ignorance?

 

   Learns are learnt from studying in Universities , laws are nor learnt from people holding up signs in the streets .

   If Jurors don't know the law, then there are legal people in Court to inform them of the law and there's also avenues to appeal decisions 

Edited April 7, 20242 yr by Nick Carter icp

Drive over anyone sitting in the middle of a highway.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

While I agree about the draconian laws concerning the right to protest ( has the UK government gone collectively insane? ) I disagree that any words coming out of Greta's mouth are the truth.

has the UK government gone collectively insane? 

 

No that's Scotland that went insane

She is tenacious and trying to change things for the better. She should be applauded for that. 

Very good to see she's getting on people's nerves.

1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Learns are learnt from studying in Universities , laws are nor learnt from people holding up signs in the streets .

   If Jurors don't know the law, then there are legal people in Court to inform them of the law and there's also avenues to appeal decisions 

 

Not only is that complete and utter nonsense, it's scary to think that people who think like you exist in society.

 

It is willing compliance such as yours that allows government corruption to exist. Germany didn't become fascist overnight. It took people like you, actively defending the erosion of public rights, thus emboldening the government to remove more and more liberties.

 

There should never be restrictions on facts, especially when it's governments or the judiciary doing the restricting.

13 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Not only is that complete and utter nonsense, it's scary to think that people who think like you exist in society.

 

It is willing compliance such as yours that allows government corruption to exist. Germany didn't become fascist overnight. It took people like you, actively defending the erosion of public rights, thus emboldening the government to remove more and more liberties.

 

There should never be restrictions on facts, especially when it's governments or the judiciary doing the restricting.

 

   You cannot have people outside Courts trying to influence the Jury . 

Judges inside the Court know the laws , its never been allowed to stand outside Courts telling the Jurors what to do . 

   So you agree that Tommy Robinson should be allowed to stand outside Courts shouting at the jurors and Judges ?

   Its a rather large step to take from banning people from standing outside Courts with placards to another Hitler taking over and the UK becoming the 4 th Reich 

1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   She was standing outside a Court trying to influence the Judges decision in a Court case . 

She was interfering with the justice system , jury knobbling as they call it . 

    Greeta and her mob get away with disruption and damaging things with little punishment in the UK

Pinned

2 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   You cannot have people outside Courts trying to influence the Jury . 

Judges inside the Court know the laws , its never been allowed to stand outside Courts telling the Jurors what to do . 

   So you agree that Tommy Robinson should be allowed to stand outside Courts shouting at the jurors and Judges ?

   Its a rather large step to take from banning people from standing outside Courts with placards to another Hitler taking over and the UK becoming the 4 th Reich 

 

She wasn't some venomous thug threatening retribution on the jurors should they conclude in a certain way. She was holding up an excerpt from a law book. She was highlighting a fact of law

 

If that scares you or scares the government and the judiciary then we are in a very bad place already. 

2 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

The UK government has introduced some very draconian laws limiting freedom to protest, and absolutely disproportionate sentencing for having the temerity to stand up against government and big business, so it is quite possible that if she falls foul of those laws in the UK in the future, she too could end up in jail for years for speaking the truth. 

 

Fears over right to protest after woman with sign at climate trial prosecuted

Civil liberty campaigners have warned that the prosecution of a woman for holding up a placard about the rights of jurors outside a court is part of the government’s increasing attacks on the right to protest.

Eeeeeeeeer, she's not in the UK.........Hold fire chap, I will let you know when you Scottish Nationalists have an opening, if you like........🤣

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

She wasn't some venomous thug threatening retribution on the jurors should they conclude in a certain way. She was holding up an excerpt from a law book. She was highlighting a fact of law

 

If that scares you or scares the government and the judiciary then we are in a very bad place already. 

Correct, she is just a fruitcake that is now years older and should be ignored.

Her parents should be ashamed for pulling her strings as a kid and creating a fruitcake..🤔

13 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

She wasn't some venomous thug threatening retribution on the jurors should they conclude in a certain way.

 

   Neither was Tommy , Tommy was holding up signs telling Jurors information that could influence the trials taking place inside the Court . 

   He was stopped from doing that , just like you lady was .

If you agree with her , then you must agree with Tommy as well

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Neither was Tommy , Tommy was holding up signs telling Jurors information that could influence the trials taking place inside the Court . 

   He was stopped from doing that , just like you lady was .

If you agree with her , then you must agree with Tommy as well

 

I don't recall the details of his banner. Did it also state an objective fact of law?

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I don't recall the details of his banner. Did it also state an objective fact of law?

 

   It did yes . 

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   It did yes . 

So what did it say?

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I don't recall the details of his banner. Did it also state an objective fact of law?

 

   You didn't read Tommys banner !!!!!!

OMG , the Nazis will take over if peoples banners don't get read .

Banners need to be shown and they need to be read 

A post with a trolling meme contravening our Community Standards has been removed.

3 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

The UK government has introduced some very draconian laws limiting freedom to protest, and absolutely disproportionate sentencing for having the temerity to stand up against government and big business, so it is quite possible that if she falls foul of those laws in the UK in the future, she too could end up in jail for years for speaking the truth. 

If your name was Jane Average - Commoner, then "Yes."  The UK legal system would hammer you.

When your name is Greta Thunberg - Darling of Corporate Climate Activism, then "No."  Her corporate and NGO sponsors will lawyer her up and paid whatever is needed to get her to her next scheduled event.

28 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Neither was Tommy , Tommy was holding up signs telling Jurors information that could influence the trials taking place inside the Court . 

   He was stopped from doing that , just like you lady was .

If you agree with her , then you must agree with Tommy as well

Odd you should go straight to that racist to prop up your argument.

 

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

She is tenacious and trying to change things for the better.

No. She is an attention seeking scrounger, living on publicity and handouts.

She probably could not get a proper job if she tried.

Free food in gaol darling.

23 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   It did yes . 

 

I have since read the details of his arrest. I am happy to confirm that it bears no similarities whatsoever with the case I mentioned other than they both took place outside a court. Glad to have cleared that up for you.

Just now, Tropicalevo said:

No. She is an attention seeking scrounger, living on publicity and handouts.

She probably could not get a proper job if she tried.

Free food in gaol darling.

Nothing you say contradicts my post. Why did you start with 'no'?