Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Well, most people who've mentioned it on a local radio station have given their support to the cause, if not the action

A very important distinction to make. Those members of the board who support F4J should consider whether they would be better off aligning themselves with a different pressure group, or if there isn`t one, form one.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by dr wadd

You mean the most serious charge they can throw at them without risking p*ssing off the voters of middle England. As someone pointed our earlier, if that had been a disgruntled Muslim cleric the response would have likely been very different.

Where do voters come into it?
It's parliment that's bringing the charges, not TB or any political party.

As for the support of F4J, I think this will do alot, people will hear what they stand for and be appauled by how rough a deal fathers get (I know I am), and lets face it, it's not like TB is the most popular person in the country. Loads of people would love to throw things at him without actually causing him any harm.

It's like when someone threw tinned tomatoes at him, a lot of people asked "were they still in the tin?"

relax it WAS flour, No Harm done, maybe these guys should offer to pay the cleaning bill for a few dozen underpants.

Ok its maybe's not the best way to highlight the cause of F4J, but its gotten them national headlines.
You could argue that a suffragette throwing herself in front of the kings horse was a "bloody stupid thing to do" but however the end result got what that particular lady wanted.

People read too deeply into things, I'd like to see what these guys could be charged with besides public disorder offences. There was no immitation fire arms, Ok granted it was a mysterious white powder, but it can also be argued that F4J have done the house of commons a favour by breaching security.

I am honestly not bothered that the PM had mysterious white powder thrown at him, Perhaps he wil learn of the enemies he is making by disowning the working man, the person that has traditionally been represented by the labour party, the guy is even unpopular in his constituency in sedgefield, especially after the stunt he pulled with dubya's visit.

[punky]

People seem really divided on the issue. I read in a paper today, that some fathers group has came out and said it was irresponsible.

But I thought it was inspired. I'm generally against 99% of protests, because they make someone else's life a misery (some poor innocent citizen). Protests should hurt the government, not ordinary members of the public. I think that is drastically unfair. I was against the crane stunt because of that. But here is a protester, that doesn't hurt anyone. No innocent members of the public, no police, nothing. It raised awareness. It was the perfect protest IMO.

Originally Posted by dr wadd

You mean the most serious charge they can throw at them without risking p*ssing off the voters of middle England. As someone pointed our earlier, if that had been a disgruntled Muslim cleric the response would have likely been very different.

The logical conclusion of what you're saying is that the Metropolitan Police presses charges (or not) based on the political sensitivities of the Government of the day. Now I can be as cynical as the next man, but sorry, I'm just not buying that. The voters of Middle England have got nothing to do with this. We already know from evidence given in court after the last F4J stunt that the Met are interested in throwing the book at these people, not letting them off the hook to spare the blushes of whoever is responsible for security in the Commons.

Let's get one thing clear. In English Law, those two men did not conduct an act of terrorism. They engaged in an act of political protest. Whether it overstepped the line of legitimacy and became 'threatening behaviour' will be decided in court. But it is already apparent that whatever the court decides, their actions were no more serious than threatening behaviour.