Diane Abbott has joined a small group of Labour and former Labour MPs in opposing a government move to designate the pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation. Despite the rebellion, the legislation passed overwhelmingly in the House of Commons on Wednesday with 385 votes in favour and just 26 against—a majority of 359.

 

 

Nine Labour MPs voted against the proscription, along with several independent MPs including former party leader Jeremy Corbyn and ex-shadow chancellor John McDonnell. The measure is now set to go before the House of Lords, with a vote expected Thursday. If passed, membership in or support for Palestine Action could become a criminal offence carrying a penalty of up to 14 years in prison.

 

 

Security minister Dan Jarvis defended the government's position, saying, “Palestine Action is not a legitimate protest group. People engaged in lawful protest don’t need weapons. People engaged in lawful protest do not throw smoke bombs and fire pyrotechnics around innocent members of the public. And people engaged in lawful protest do not cause millions of pounds of damage to national security infrastructure, including submarines and defence equipment for Nato.”

Remember when Palestine Action criminals broke into the University of Manchester and stole the bust of Chaim Weizmann. They painted it with “Smash Zionism” and held it ‘hostage’. This revealed their intentions were not just about ‘genocide’ but destruction of Israel itself. /5 pic.twitter.com/m3aiUqY3Im

— Heidi Bachram 🎗️ (@HeidiBachram) June 21, 2025

 

The government’s decision follows an incident on June 20 in which two aircraft were vandalised at RAF Brize Norton—an attack claimed by Palestine Action. Five individuals have since been arrested on suspicion of terrorism-related offences. Jarvis described the act as “just the latest episode in Palestine Action’s long history of harmful activity,” adding, “Palestine Action has orchestrated a nationwide campaign of property damage featuring attacks that have resulted in serious damage to property and crossed the threshold from direct criminal action into terrorism.”

 

 

But the move has sparked fierce criticism from several MPs. Zarah Sultana, Independent MP for Coventry South, called the proscription a “draconian overreach” and compared it to the criminalisation of historical protest movements like the Suffragettes. “To equate a spray can of paint with a suicide bomb isn’t just absurd, it is grotesque,” she said. “It is a deliberate distortion of the law to chill dissent, criminalise solidarity and suppress the truth.”

 

Clive Lewis, Labour MP for Norwich South and a former soldier, also raised serious concerns. “I understand what terrorism is. I was in London on July 7 in 2005 and I watched my community, this city, attacked by real terrorists,” he said. “And at that point, rightly or wrongly, I decided I was going to Afghanistan to fight the terrorists. And I went because I love this country, and I love our democracy, and I want to see it protected. I think today’s proscription order against Palestine Action undermines that and I wish my Government wouldn’t do it.”

 

Outside Parliament, the fallout was immediate. More than 1,000 demonstrators gathered in Westminster for a protest against the planned ban. Among the speakers were Jeremy Corbyn, Ayoub Khan and John McDonnell, who said the proscription “was an attack on democracy and an attack on all of us.” The protest was punctuated with chants of “free, free Palestine” and “from the river to the sea.” Tensions escalated when two men draped in Israeli flags appeared, prompting louder chants, including “death, death to the IDF” and “IDF are terrorists.”

 

The protest also saw four arrests, including a man who blocked Downing Street’s gates with his mobility scooter and a woman who locked herself onto a suitcase outside Parliament. The Metropolitan Police cited breaches of Public Order Act conditions imposed to manage the protest.

Palestine Action has stated it will seek a legal challenge against its proscription. A hearing scheduled for Friday will determine whether the ban can be temporarily blocked while a longer legal process unfolds.

 

Meanwhile, MPs also voted to proscribe two white supremacist organisations: the Maniacs Murder Cult, a neo-Nazi group linked to global violence, and the Russian Imperial Movement, whose paramilitary arm has fought alongside Russian forces in Ukraine.

 

Lord Walney, former government adviser on political violence, welcomed the vote, saying, “This is not about banning peaceful protest but putting a stop to a group known for its use of violence and intimidation of workers.” He warned Labour to take a hard line: “Labour must make clear to the rebels that once proscription is in place, any further sympathy for this group will result in their immediate expulsion from the Party.”

 

Related Topics:

Palestine Action Echo Glastonbury Chant ‘death to the IDF’

‘Damage as much as possible’ Undercover with Palestine Action

How in Just 5 Years The Corbynista Huda Ammori Steered Palestine Action's Militant Campaign

Watch: Activists Claim Damage to RAF Military Aircraft in Protest Against Gaza Operations

Sabotage Campaign Targets UK Defence Suppliers in Unrelenting Attacks

Activists Vandalize Trump’s Turnberry Golf Course in Pro-Palestinian Protest

Pro-Palestinian Students Vandalize Cambridge University's Senate House in Gaza Protest

Pro-Palestine Activists Vandalize Barclays and JP Morgan Buildings in Leeds

Pro-Palestine Mobs Wreck Barclays Banks Across the UK

7 Activists Face Court Alleged Terrorist-Related Actions at Israeli Defence Firm UK Site

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph  2025-07-04

 

 

No surprise from this clown.

 

What a disgrace this woman is. 

Doesn't make sense that these people vote against proscribing 'Palestine Action' a terrorist organization?

What possible reasons could they have?

10 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

Doesn't make sense that these people vote against proscribing 'Palestine Action' a terrorist organization?

What possible reasons could they have?

 

Some of them, really do hate the UK.

 

The last prominent Politician that had the UK's interest at heart was Thatcher ( Even her mistakes ) were done in the best interests of the UK.

 

From then on, it's only ever been downhill, starting with Major.

10 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

Doesn't make sense that these people vote against proscribing 'Palestine Action' a terrorist organization?

What possible reasons could they have?

 

Like many Labour politicians, she hates the UK.

 

Therefore she doesn't wish to see any organizations seeking to damage UK interests labelled a terrorist organization.

 

It's really that simple. 

She is a reflection of her [politically active] constituents. 

 

Her [politically active] constituents are those that organise effective political campaigns to help her stay elected.

 

In certain sections of the UK constituency, the topic of Palestine seems to be more important than the affairs of the UK. 

 

I would not vote her for her if you paid me. 

 

This all reflects Britain today.

 

Is she on ugly tablets???? I wouldn't stick a tail on that even is she paid me.

Who actually votes for this retard? 

Incoming court case.

41 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

Doesn't make sense that these people vote against proscribing 'Palestine Action' a terrorist organization?

What possible reasons could they have?

 

We already have laws in place to prosecute them for their actions. Why do we need to label them terrorists? 

18 minutes ago, MarkT63 said:

Who actually votes for this retard? 

 

Well, she once shared a bed for a few years with Jeremy Corbyn.  Can't think of a nicer couple....🥰

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

 

We already have laws in place to prosecute them for their actions. Why do we need to label them terrorists? 

 

Why have the 2 Ukrainian rent boys / models / male escorts, causing criminal damage been charged under terrorism offences ?
 

Can you not see the direction of travel under Starmer & Labour.

 

It is similar to the SNPs hate speech laws

 

Dissent of the so called Politicians and so called Leaders is forbidden.

 

Heading down the path to resemble North Korea.

4 minutes ago, blazes said:

 

Well, she once shared a bed for a few years with Jeremy Corbyn.  Can't think of a nicer couple....🥰

 

Will she run off and join the new Party ?
 

Quote

Zarah Sultana has resigned from the Labour Party, saying she will create a new party with Jeremy Corbyn. 

Sultana, the MP for Coventry South, has sat as an independent since July 2024, when she had the Labour whip removed for voting against the government on the two-child benefit cap. 

In a post on X, Sultana accused the government of “wanting to make disabled people suffer”, and being an “active participant in genocide” in Gaza.

 

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/mp-zarah-sultana-quits-labour-to-form-party-with-jeremy-corbyn-gx69tpr8n

15 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Will she run off and join the new Party ?
 

 

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/mp-zarah-sultana-quits-labour-to-form-party-with-jeremy-corbyn-gx69tpr8n

 

Interestingly, 5 years ago Sultana backed a bill that would compel an MP who changed parties to be subject to a recall petition, and if 10% of their electorate backed it, the seat would be declared vacant. I wonder will she honour her previous convictions. 

47 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

We already have laws in place to prosecute them for their actions. Why do we need to label them terrorists? 

Do you think we should legalise Al Qaeda and Islamic State too? Why label them terrorists? 

52 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

We already have laws in place to prosecute them for their actions. Why do we need to label them terrorists? 

Over 7 million in damages carried out at Brize Norton for a political cause makes them terrorists, that's without all the other acts of violence they carried out. Their whole mission clearly stated is violence for their cause.  Significant damage can be considered a terrorist act. They are certainly doing that.

6 minutes ago, sungod said:

Do you think we should legalise Al Qaeda and Islamic State too? Why label them terrorists? 

 

If this protest group begins to plant bombs, behead people and commit other such atrocities then certainly. 

 

By the same token, should all people who commit acts of vandalism on public property be labelled terrorists? 

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Over 7 million in damages carried out at Brize Norton for a political cause makes them terrorists, that's without all the other acts of violence they carried out. Their whole mission clearly stated is violence for their cause.  Significant damage can be considered a terrorist act. They are certainly doing that.

 

Which law defines the escalation of a charge from vandalism to terrorism based upon the financial cost of the attack? 

 

What other acts of violence have they carried out? 

8 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Which law defines the escalation of a charge from vandalism to terrorism based upon the financial cost of the attack? 

 

What other acts of violence have they carried out? 

"significant damage" is the bar and along with a reason/cause for the damage to change gov decisions or influence, 7 million and way over that passes that easily and falls well within the UK Terrorism Act 2000, check up on it.

 

In the UK, significant damage to property motivated by a political cause can be considered an act of terrorism if it's intended to influence the government or intimidate the public. The UK's definition of terrorism includes actions or threats that are designed to influence the government or intimidate the public, and are made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial, or ideological cause. 

 

https://www.educateagainsthate.com/terrorism-definition/

https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism

 

As for what other acts of violence they have carried out, just look at the OP and related topics........

 

 

Abbott has a face that would make an onion cry

10 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

If this protest group begins to plant bombs, behead people and commit other such atrocities then certainly. 

 

By the same token, should all people who commit acts of vandalism on public property be labelled terrorists? 

 

Yes they are clearly terrorists. Look at their actions. 

 

And certainly when compared to "Prevent"'s definition where you only have to support an idea (that is currently held by millions of UK citizens) to be labelled not only a terrorist, but an extreme right wing terrorist.  😃

 

11 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Which law defines the escalation of a charge from vandalism to terrorism based upon the financial cost of the attack? 

 

''Serious damage to property'.

9 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

"significant damage" is the bar and along with a reason/cause for the damage to change gov decisions or influence, 7 million and way over that passes that easily and falls well within the UK Terrorism Act 2000, check up on it.

 

Abbott probably thinks you can buy 10 of these planes for 50 grand. 😃

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-interview-lbc-police-cost-numbers-awkward-excrutiating-a7712916.html

 

 

4 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

 

''Serious damage to property'.

 

Is that the name of an English law or just a phrase you cobbled together? 

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Is that the name of an English law or just a phrase you cobbled together? 

Legal:

 

17 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

"significant damage" is the bar and along with a reason/cause for the damage to change gov decisions or influence, 7 million and way over that passes that easily and falls well within the UK Terrorism Act 2000, check up on it.

 

In the UK, significant damage to property motivated by a political cause can be considered an act of terrorism if it's intended to influence the government or intimidate the public. The UK's definition of terrorism includes actions or threats that are designed to influence the government or intimidate the public, and are made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial, or ideological cause. 

 

https://www.educateagainsthate.com/terrorism-definition/

https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism

 

As for what other acts of violence they have carried out, just look at the OP and related topics........

 

 

 

Thank you, I am now better informed. 

 

It does feel, however, that equating the actions of a pressure group with those who set out to deliberately kill innocent people is an abuse of the term. 

Just now, RuamRudy said:

 

Thank you, I am now better informed. 

 

It does feel, however, that equating the actions of a pressure group with those who set out to deliberately kill innocent people is an abuse of the term. 

What you feel has nothing to do with terrorism & UK Law.

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

What you feel has nothing to do with terrorism & UK Law.

 

What they did had nothing to do with terrorism - just because the law says otherwise doesn't make it so; just another bad law written by weak politicians.

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

What they did had nothing to do with terrorism - just because the law says otherwise doesn't make it so; just another bad law written by weak politicians.

What they did fell exactly within the Terrorism Act 2000 which is there for a reason. But hey, got it, you are now arguing against the Terrorism act 2000 and have joined Diane Abbot in her isolated rambles. 

1 hour ago, blazes said:

 

Well, she once shared a bed for a few years with Jeremy Corbyn.  Can't think of a nicer couple....🥰

 

Yes.

We all remember Jeremy Corbyn, fondly.