We need to prevent the UK Gov from banning Palestine Action group and also prevent the group from being proscribed as a terrorist organisation.

It's really important to sign, share or chip in if you're able to do so.

The Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has said she will lay an order before Parliament sometime during the end of June 2025, to make membership and support for the group Palestine Action illegal under the Terrorism Act 2000.

What's at stake?

Peaceful protest has been ignored for 20+ months while the UK Government continue to support Israel, and Israeli forces are causing severe harm to children / civilians every single day, in many cases causing death, or dismemberment, severe burns or starvation.

If the UK Government is allowed to suppress Direct Action for Palestine, we fail as a nation that stands for peace, justice and humanity.

What happened?

News came about after two people took illegal action, trespassing on the UK military base RAF Brize Norton on June 20, 2025.

The activists were motivated by the following key reasons, as stated by the group Palestine Action:

1. Symbolic Protest Against UK Complicity in Gaza Conflict

   The red paint symbolized Palestinian bloodshed, representing civilian casualties in Gaza. The group aimed to visually associate UK military assets with the humanitarian crisis, declaring the act a direct intervention against "genocide and war crimes".

2. Accusations of UK Military Support for Israel

   Palestine Action claimed the targeted Airbus Voyager aircraft were used to:  

   - Refuel U.S. and Israeli fighter jets involved in Gaza operations.

   - Transport military cargo and conduct intelligence flights over Gaza via RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus.

   They asserted Britain was an "active participant" in the conflict despite official condemnations of Israeli actions.

3. Tactical Disruption of Military Operations

   By damaging the engines with crowbars and paint-filled fire extinguishers, the group intended to decommission the planes and disrupt missions they believed supported "oppression" in Gaza and the Middle East. Their video showed activists evading security on electric scooters to highlight base vulnerabilities.

UK Government and Military Rebuttals

- The Ministry of Defence (MoD) and independent experts (e.g., former RAF Deputy Commander Greg Bagwell) refuted the claims, stating Voyager aircraft use drogue-probe refueling systems, which are incompatible with Israeli jets (requiring boom refueling). The planes were instead used for anti-ISIS operations and Red Sea missions.

- The MoD confirmed no flights or operations were disrupted, and the damaged planes were unrelated to Israel.

Political Reactions

- Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the "disgraceful vandalism," leading to a full security review of UK defense sites.

- Conservative MPs labeled the breach "absolutely staggering" and raised national security concerns.

This protest reflects escalating tactics by activist groups targeting perceived enablers of the Gaza conflict, though their assertions about the aircraft's role were contested by officials.

If anything, the activists have highlighted a critical failure in UK military base security.

Was it terrorism?

Based on the Oxford Dictionary definition of terrorism ("the use of violent action in order to achieve political aims or to force a government to act") and the legal framework under the UK Terrorism Act 2000, the actions by Palestine Action at RAF Brize Norton do not clearly meet the criteria for terrorism. Here's a breakdown:

🔍 1. Key Elements of Terrorism

   - Violent Action: The activists sprayed paint into aircraft engines and used crowbars, causing property damage . However, this did not involve violence against people, endanger lives, or create public safety risks (e.g., explosives or weapons were not used).

   - Political Aims: The group explicitly aimed to protest UK military support for Israel, calling it "complicity in Gaza genocide" . This satisfies the "political aims" component.

   - Coercion/Intimidation: While the act targeted government assets, the primary goal was symbolic disruption (decommissioning planes) rather than intimidating the public or coercing policy changes through fear.

⚖️ 2. UK Terrorism Act 2000 Assessment

   Under the Act, terrorism requires:

   - Serious violence/damage: Paint damage to engines (costly but reparable) and non-critical crowbar strikes may not qualify as "serious damage" under legal thresholds.

   - Endangering life or public safety: No evidence suggests lives were threatened; the base was minimally staffed during the incident.

   - Ideological coercion: The activists sought media attention for Palestine, not systemic terror.

🛡️ 3. Government and Legal Response

   - Authorities treated the incident as criminal damage, not terrorism. Counter-terrorism police assisted due to the high-profile target, but no terrorism charges were filed.

   - The UK later moved to ban Palestine Action under anti-terrorism laws, citing a "long history of criminal damage". This reflects a political designation, not a legal confirmation of terrorism.

🆚 4. Contrast with Clear-Cut Terrorism

   - Unlike groups like Hamas or al-Qaeda, Palestine Action's tactics avoid bodily harm. The UK defines terrorism as actions "designed to influence the government or intimidate the public" through violence . Their paint protest—while illegal—lacks this intent.

💎 Conclusion

The activists' actions meet the political aim criterion but fall short of violence or coercion required for terrorism under the Oxford definition or UK law. Authorities classified it as criminal vandalism, though the government's ban leverages anti-terrorism statutes for deterrence . Legal experts note such property damage typically faces charges like trespassing or sabotage, not terrorism.

Please sign, share or chip in. Get thus this petition sent to everyone you know in the UK who stands for humanity. We must prevent the UK government from abusing their power.

Thank you!