Three Palestine Action protestors end their hunger strike

Freya5

Whitewavemark2

This is one of the reasons we are dropping down the human rights table.

Really. Their choice to starve themselves. No sympathy . Violent thugs. Choose Palestine, go there.

No, it cannot be that Whitewave, surely?

To hae force fed them would have been against their human rights. By allowing them to starve according to their express wishes is upholding their human rights.

Babsbada

Sudan- Afghanistan- Iran - where are the demonstrators for the rights of the people in these countries? Whats been done in Gaza is beyond awful but Hamas started this war with the vicious October festival massacre. Why is Israel singled out for demonstrations and boycott?

Because so many people hate Jews and the Pro Palestine marches have caused even more hate which is exactly what they wanted.

Maremia

I didn't realise that mouse. So, why are they being treated like this, I wonder?

They were charged and on remand in prison until their trial.
They weren’t treated like anything other than normal prisoners and they chose a hunger strike as they hoped it would garner support for their horrible group.

I wonder how many of the recent hunger striker's sympathisers supported the IRA Hunger Strikers of 1981 ? They had a 'cause' and wanted a 'change'. See where it got them.

Whitewavemark2

This is one of the reasons we are dropping down the human rights table.

Really. Their choice to starve themselves. No sympathy . Violent thugs. Choose Palestine, go there.

Sudan- Afghanistan- Iran - where are the demonstrators for the rights of the people in these countries? Whats been done in Gaza is beyond awful but Hamas started this war with the vicious October festival massacre. Why is Israel singled out for demonstrations and boycott?

I agree.

I wonder if anyone on here has been force fed?

Allira I have zero sympathy for anyone who uses violence against innocent people doing their job.

They should remain on remand till their trial, no ifs nor buts!

GrannyGravy13

Maremia

I didn't realise that mouse. So, why are they being treated like this, I wonder?

Well if they attacked a police officer as posted on this thread of course they will be kept on remand.

I do not want violent people walking the streets of the U.K.

They injured two police officers and one security guard, and are charged with other serious offences.
One police sergeant was very seriously injured by two of the defendants.

If they want to go on hunger strike and die as a result, it is against their human rights to stop them.

Maremia

I didn't realise that mouse. So, why are they being treated like this, I wonder?

Well if they attacked a police officer as posted on this thread of course they will be kept on remand.

I do not want violent people walking the streets of the U.K.

Baggs

mouse44

Oreo and others, you probably did not realise that the hunger strikers had not yet been convicted of any crime. They had been on remand since they were arrested in November 2024 and were not due to be tried until June next year at the earliest. The rule says that prisoners should not be on remand for more than 6 months. They have not been charged with terrorist offences and yet they are being treated as terrorists - denied books, allowed only minimal visits etc. Their alleged offences took place before Palestine Action was proscribed as a terrorist group. Until the case is tried we do not know exactly what they did; much has been exaggerated by social media. I feel very glad that some sort of compromise has been reached and these young people have not died.

Interesting, mouse44. If they are waiting for trial (like lots of other people because of lawyerly delays), surely they have been charged?

I've just found this on skynews:
"Their lawyers say that by the time of their trial, they will have spent more than a year in custody - long past the standard six-month custody time limit set out in UK law.

Prisons minister Lord Timpson has said the prisoners are charged with serious offences and remand decisions are for independent judges."

Standard six-month time limit. So sometimes it's different depending on the seriousness of offences, one presumes.

Some people charged with offences have been waiting far longer for a trial. They may or not be in custody but the uncertainty can last for years as highlighted in some recent, completely different, cases.

All of them have been objecting to the time on remand ahead of trials, which are up to a year away due to the unprecedented court backlogs.
Hunger strikes are deemed to be part of the right to protest under human rights law, which means the state no longer has any power to forcibly feed a prisoner, unless doctors conclude they lack the mental capacity to understand the consequences of their actions.

If a prisoner understands the risk that they may die and has made their wishes clear, doctors will not give them food, even if it would save their life.

BBC News

I didn't realise that mouse. So, why are they being treated like this, I wonder?

Just a thought.... I've never been on remand and so can't really imagine what it's like but I very much doubt I'd feel I was in a position to make 'demands'.

👍

Whitewavemark2

Baggs

Whitewavemark2

This is one of the reasons we are dropping down the human rights table.

I don't understand this. The protestors practised their human rights. They also caused damage to property that was not theirs which is why they ended up in prison. Their decision to starve themselves was also their own choice and not forced upon them.

Whether one agreed with their cause is irrelevant. Their protest caused criminal damage. That's not within the remit of peaceful protest.

Exactly what human rights were they denied?

Sorry I sort of misled - The UK is dropping down the rankings because of our freedom of speech/peaceful protest issues and limitations.

The resultant punishments have become more draconian.

I see. Thanks, wwm2.

mouse44

Oreo and others, you probably did not realise that the hunger strikers had not yet been convicted of any crime. They had been on remand since they were arrested in November 2024 and were not due to be tried until June next year at the earliest. The rule says that prisoners should not be on remand for more than 6 months. They have not been charged with terrorist offences and yet they are being treated as terrorists - denied books, allowed only minimal visits etc. Their alleged offences took place before Palestine Action was proscribed as a terrorist group. Until the case is tried we do not know exactly what they did; much has been exaggerated by social media. I feel very glad that some sort of compromise has been reached and these young people have not died.

Interesting, mouse44. If they are waiting for trial (like lots of other people because of lawyerly delays), surely they have been charged?

I've just found this on skynews:
"Their lawyers say that by the time of their trial, they will have spent more than a year in custody - long past the standard six-month custody time limit set out in UK law.

Prisons minister Lord Timpson has said the prisoners are charged with serious offences and remand decisions are for independent judges."

Standard six-month time limit. So sometimes it's different depending on the seriousness of offences, one presumes.

Baggs

Whitewavemark2

This is one of the reasons we are dropping down the human rights table.

I don't understand this. The protestors practised their human rights. They also caused damage to property that was not theirs which is why they ended up in prison. Their decision to starve themselves was also their own choice and not forced upon them.

Whether one agreed with their cause is irrelevant. Their protest caused criminal damage. That's not within the remit of peaceful protest.

Exactly what human rights were they denied?

Sorry I sort of misled - The UK is dropping down the rankings because of our freedom of speech/peaceful protest issues and limitations.

The resultant punishments have become more draconian.

Whitewavemark2

This is one of the reasons we are dropping down the human rights table.

I don't understand this. The protestors practised their human rights. They also caused damage to property that was not theirs which is why they ended up in prison. Their decision to starve themselves was also their own choice and not forced upon them.

Whether one agreed with their cause is irrelevant. Their protest caused criminal damage. That's not within the remit of peaceful protest.

Exactly what human rights were they denied?

Oreo and others, you probably did not realise that the hunger strikers had not yet been convicted of any crime. They had been on remand since they were arrested in November 2024 and were not due to be tried until June next year at the earliest. The rule says that prisoners should not be on remand for more than 6 months. They have not been charged with terrorist offences and yet they are being treated as terrorists - denied books, allowed only minimal visits etc. Their alleged offences took place before Palestine Action was proscribed as a terrorist group. Until the case is tried we do not know exactly what they did; much has been exaggerated by social media. I feel very glad that some sort of compromise has been reached and these young people have not died.

They were never on a hunger strike; they took turns in missing a meal. A bit like the 5:2 diet. Bobby Sands died after 66 days, they are fit as fiddles and boasting they stopped Elbit getting a contract which is nonsense, a US company underbid.
They caused thousands of £s of damage and attacked a woman police officer with a sledge hammer.
Don't suppose anyone asked how she was.

These prisoners caused £7million pounds worth of damage to aircraft at Brize Norton. This not only damages the defences of our country but also costs the UK Taxpayer money. These people are criminals.

One of these morons used a sledgehammer on a female police officer breaking her spine in two places, no one should have any sympathy with them.

Very sensible of them to stop in the end. No government or judicial system should give into moral blackmail. Their alleged offences were appalling.

Well put, REKA.

They weren't being 'left to starve to death'. Their actions were entirely of their own choosing. I'm sure if they were being force fed, their supporters would also be up in arms.