Didn't that group attack an RAF base?
After the 2024 riots there were mass arrests and prosecution, but only talk about reviewing groups as to whether they should be proscribed.
Why does a member throwing a can of paint get you classed as a terrorist organisation, while organising riots that involve throwing molotov's and causing serious injury not?
"disabled aircraft using paint and crowbars"
Is that "terror"?
Besides, why not prosecute them for their actions, why proscribe the organisation as a terrorist one, while at the same time ignoring groups who commit much more violent offenses (such as the one given) and concentrate on prosecuting "personal responsibility"?
Is that for or against the governments hypocritical position?
> why proscribe the organisation as a terrorist one, while at the same time ignoring groups who commit much more violent offenses
You seem to completely ignore this.
i just thought it was GBH, but i'll update my definition if you can cite your sources...
Yes.