I share this report from The Guardian because I think it is necessary to do so:
Armed police threatened a peaceful protester with arrest under the Terrorism Act for holding a Palestinian flag and having signs saying “Free Gaza” and “Israel is committing genocide”, accusing her of supporting a proscribed organisation.
Officers told Laura Murton, 42, that her demonstration in Canterbury, Kent, on Monday evening expressed views supportive of Palestine Action, which was banned under terrorism legislation earlier this month.
Murton said neither of her signs mentioned Palestine Action. When asked directly whether she supported any proscribed organisations, she replied: “I do not.”
In the encounter, which she filmed, one officer told her: “Mentioning freedom of Gaza, Israel, genocide, all of that all come under proscribed groups, which are terror groups that have been dictated by the government.”
A Kent police spokesperson said: “Under the Terrorism Act it is a criminal offence to carry or display items that may arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation such as Palestine Action.”
This is absurd and factually wrong. You cannot impute what has not been said to create an offence that has not been committed. And you cannot limit free speech in this way. But, totally unsurprisingly, that is exactly how the police are interpreting the ban on Palestine Action when no reference to them, let alone any indication of support, is being made.
This is deeply chilling for those, like me, who support free speech.
So let me be clear:
I support Palestinians
I think Palestine should be free
I think Gaza and the occupied West Bank should be freed from Israeli control
I believe Israel is committing genocide
When saying so, nothing I suggest can be taken as a suggestion that I support Palestine Action. I am using plain words in a plain way to communicate a plain message. I do so because I have the right to think those things.
The police know where I am, but there is no way on earth that I have committed an offence, and they know that too.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I share your beliefs
Given that I have already expressed concern over the ‘capture’ of UK politics by Zionists might I also ask how and why the Police have become captured by Zionism?
Thank you, John.
Under Blair, the UK and Israel signed a security cooperation agreement. That was updated under Johnson. Patel and Wallace were at the signing ceremony.
Cooperation goes back to, at least, the 1970s and is rumoured to have extended to Northern Ireland, the miners’ strike and counter-terrorism operations in the mid-noughties, including the exchange of personnel, training and development of weapons.
With regard to the capture of the British state, unfortunately, British politicians and officials are susceptible to “douceurs” (Foreign Office language for bribes) and blackmail, some are true believers and others are cynics. Israel and its local proxies are generous with funding and have a network to act as gatekeepers and ensure their allies prosper.
Chief police officer posts are political appointments, so one has to get with the programme.
I also support Palestinians.
I also think Palestine should be free.
I also think Gaza and the occupied West Bank should be freed from Israeli control.
I also believe Israel is committing genocide.
I am happy to stand trial for these views, my real full name is given above. Thanks Richard, you are a hero.
I am Spartacus.
I can never understand how people can ring the police because their house has been broken into, and be told there is no officer available. Yet if a little old lady in London holds a piece of card up with some writing on it 30 to 40 police arrive in minutes.
Because the British state despises being questioned. To do so brings the British state out in a rash of authoritarianism.
Starmer’s gov sets the tone & the plods willingly “just follow orders”. We have been here before and this only further shows that the current gov does not & never has represented the interests of Uk citizens.
As Reeves mansion house speech shows, it represents the interests of the City of London and as the action of the plods in Canterbury show, the interests of zionists. The interests of both groups (City and zionists) are inimicable to the well being of Uk citizens. The city through its actions pauperises UK citizens, zionists expose UK citizens to reprisals (ref 7/7 in London and similar actions elsewhere in the UK). Both groups are a threat to citizens well being and security.
I wonder when LINO MPs will start to see this? Do something now = chance of survival in 2029. Do nothing – you WILL be electorally eliminated and deservedly so.
Apologies – posting twice. Obvs, I support the statements. Putting them into context:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/16/sayfollah-musallet-west-bank-florida
This is how zionism looks. This is what it is. Murder, genocide.
My question to UK plods: do you support zionism?
Do you think Israeli jews (for that is what they are) beating somebody to death in the name of zionism is OK?
I do not know about the British police but they certainly no longer seem to represent the interest of UK citizens – then have a look at the list of MPs who are ‘Labour Friends of Israel’ – could ‘they’ now force the closure of the Guardian because of this report? Thanks to @Mike Parr for bringing that article to my attention – horrific, and indeed for earlier post. I support all that Richard has stated, and with those who have already supported his statement. My full name is given above.
I agree with your position. I guess we’ll be cell mates.
And you support the release of the hostages held in Gaza too right?
Of course.
And the 10,000 Palestinians held hostage. That after all was what the misguided Oct 7th operation was about – kidnapping hostages to exchange for the then 5000 hostages kidnapped by the IOF including the 700 Palestinian children Israel kidnaps each year.
If the police are going to use terrorist tactics then they are the terrorists. Not me. They are creating a climate of fear and supporting them is a terrorist offense.
The word “terrorist” was coined in the 1790s to refer to French government and police repression, so we’re going back to its original meaning apparently.
Well said.
When I read the article, all I could see was mission creep in the interpretation by over-zealous police people who are no doubt under some sort of performance regime to nab a few people supporting you know who?
Another sorry tale in our failed state.
Well said
I support you on all four counts
Many on here presumably agree. Freedom of speech is a critical right, and it is not an offence to say this. So, to state the same: I support Palestinians
I think Palestine should be free
I think Gaza and the occupied West Bank should be freed from Israeli control
I believe Israel is committing genocide
Whose “reasonable suspicion”?
Might such wording not only destroy free speech but the whole basis of our legal system?
Might “pro dubio reo”/when there is doubt, judgement must go to the defendant require some form of palpable connection with a real or presented as terror group?
Agreed
I recall reading around the time I was a law student that there’s a case where the court’s judgment said that “reasonable suspicion” in the context of arresting someone was any suspicion that was not merely fanciful.
I’m barely 2 minutes into the video and the officer needs to be sacked.
He’s demanding her ID to basically check her name on a database to see if she has a criminal record. He’ll use that to decide whether or not to arrest her later. He then says he needs her ID because she “may be committing a criminal offence”. Well, officer, when you have established she is, and if that offence requires her ID then you may have it. Until then, demanding someone’s ID when they don’t have to legally supply it is an offence in itself.
He then says she “might be” disrupting traffic and “may be committing a public order offence as well”. Well, which one? Is it the one where a person uses threatening or abusive words or behaviour that are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress? Because she’s definitely not guilty of that. The current Israeli government are doing enough of that.
I’ve seen literally hundreds of officers over the years abuse the Terrorism Act. They usually do this to auditors who go around committing the heinous crime of… wait for it…. filming in a public place.
If you look into the Terrorism Act you’ll see there’s actually no legal requirement to give your ID. And bear in mind, the Terrorism Act also states it applies when an officer reasonably believes the person to be a terrorist. Well, if you believe someone is a terrorist then you’d better arrest them immediately rather than demand ID when they’re not legally required to give it.
He then uses “a busy roundabout a rush hour” as a reason why she needs to give her ID and get on her way.
I would implore all your readers to look at the wording of the Terrorism Act so they are familiar with it – you do NOT have to give your ID. The police officers need to be sued – they will lose. Check out Ian Gould’s blog, or the many videos of auditors who routinely sue the police for their awful behaviour.
Thanks
Appalling event … how are we to protest / comment on events in Middle East if every word becomes suspect ?
Truly shocking. Also in that article is:
“… (the policeman concerned) went on to say that the phrase “Free Gaza” is “supportive of Palestine Action”, adding it was an offence “to express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, namely Palestine Action is an offence under section 12(1A) of the Terrorism Act”. The officer told her she had committed that offence.”
Which is, almost word for word, the concern expressed by Lord Anderson in his speech to the Lords that you cited on July 5th.
Correct, and agreed. And the officer’s claim is very obviously false.
You’d think it straightforward enough to understand, wouldn’t you. No mention of a proscribed organisation: no offence. So it’d be interesting – and indeed essential – if the government would publish the exact advice and guidance that has been given to police forces, and for police forces to also publish the guidance and advice they’re using so the public – who they’re supposed to serve – and the legal profession, can see if what they’re operating to is correct. It seems from this episode that it isn’t. Or if the police think it is then there’s some serious over-reach going on.
Your large print thoughts are mine too.
Totally support your article.
The police can easily find me. I almost hope they do. I shall be interested to see how far they get with convicting me.
Thank you for all you do, Richard.
I agree entirely with you on this matter. I have always supported Israel’s right to exist and have always supported Palestine’s right to exist as a free country. I have held these beliefs for decades. I had never heard of Palestine Action until a few weeks ago. As far as I am aware they are a group of activists supporting Palestine’s right to exist who spray painted a plane. I do not know what other acts of protest they have pursued. I am not a member or a supporter of the group. I do believe that Israel is intent on genocide as a means of taking possession of the Palestinian lands. I have read sections of the terrorism act and it certainly terrifies me by the breadth of its power to intimidate and prevent protest.
As a resident of Canterbury I have forwarded this article to my local MP with a complaint about how Kent police acted on this occasion. The video was truly chilling. By the way, the roundabout where it happened is always jammed so I doubt if any of the protestors could have visibly made the traffic any worse!
And as far as I can see this incident is not reported by the BBC.
The Met will be busy on Saturday at the pro-Palestine rally in London then, probably even more so if they offer some overtime to Kent colleagues. Maybe Trump will offer to Airbus in some National Guard support to help out.
Have a look at this morning’s blog post by Craig Murray ‘The Big Chill’. Alarming.
The Big Chill by Craig Murray (July 17, 2025)
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2025/07/the-big-chill/
I have retweeted this and recommend the article
May I also add an excellent piece in the London Review of Books with a Quaker perspective? He invents a beautiful phrase: ‘… for the British government, the waging of peace is terrorism’. https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v47/n13/huw-lemmey/short-cuts
I like it
Thank you very much for saying this, Richard. I agree that such action by our police is indeed deeply chilling. I also agree with the statements you made.
I think that our government is aiding and abetting this genocide by Israel.
https://caat.org.uk/news/new-figures-reveal-massive-increase-in-uk-arms-exports-to-israel-as-government-defends-f-35-exemption-in-court/
Well said I support everything you say Richard.
the link to section 12 says ‘page not found.’
Sorry: I copied the Grauniad link
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11#reference-key-0430b8c97472f1c37f7798d5030e9b85
Then do a “find in page” search for “suspicion”. It occurs 25 times. Chilling.
Indeed…
Thank you
The fact that the police have not acted to discipline the officer and correct his mis-statements is sinister. It implies the police, and behind them the Government, agree with him. The courts however do not (as quoted in Sqwawkbox earlier this week):
“It will remain lawful for the claimant and other persons who were members of PA prior to proscription to continue to express their opposition to Israel’s actions in Gaza and elsewhere, including by drawing attention to what they regard as Israel’s genocide and other serious violations of international law. They will remain legally entitled to do so in private conversations, in print, on social media and at protests.
“Even if their protests take the form of direct action which involves criminality, the fact that they were previously members of an organisation which is now proscribed would not as a matter of law aggravate their criminal conduct.”
Justice Chamberlain, Ammori vs SSHD
Thanks
I hope the lady is assisted in pursuing a complaint about the officer, through the proper channels, wherever they are nowadays (they keep moving the complaint goalposts).
No doubt he will be encouraged to do some “reflective practice”.
Everyone please look at http://www.nakedapitalism.com, today’s article ” Project Nectar: Another Palantir Special”.
You will be very surprised what Bedford Police have signed with Palantir to provide. A surveillance scheme with very scary data fields covering all residents of Bedford.
That’s worrying…
https works better in the url.
I get a not found result using http
I did not see money mentioned. Perhaps Palantir are doing it for free? with the aim of profiling everybody … begging the question how will then use the data (obvs it will be used for control). As noted Police Chiefs are political appointments – how about holding a vote on them – by citizens.
The reason the Kent police spokesperson made that statement including the phrase “arouse reasonable suspicion” is to:
Create fear
Cause uncertainty
Encourage self-censorship
Reduce public support for peaceful protest
The sting of anti-terror legislation is in the increased arrest, detention, confiscation, bail and search powers it gives to the police, even when no charges are made.
That is, and is meant to be intimidatory. It doesn’t depend on successful prosecutions, although those may occur. It depends on large scale arrest operations, significant levels of lengthy detention, psychological bullying, prolonged confiscation and attempts to search phones, and computers, restrictions on internet use and contact with the media. (“The words of Asa Winstanley will be spoken by an actor….?)
Millions of us have to say, “I am not intimidated”.
This government is ridiculous, but that doesn’t stop it being dangerous at the same time. Goebbels was ridiculous.
I agree with Richard’s post above and with the views he expressed there.
I am not a terrorist.
I do not support terrorists, nor do I support proscribed organisations.
I refuse to be intimidated by phrases like “reasonable suspicion” or “nuisance” in objectionable authoritarian repressive legislation.
To support Palestine or to peacefully protest against the unlawful occupation of Palestine is not terrorism.
Sharpies and placards do not kill innocent civilians or endanger democracy. Repressive legislation does.
Selling F35 parts that end up in Israel does.
Assisting with aerial surveillance over Gaza does.
Delaying sanctions against the government of Israel does.
Failing to call out war crimes does.
It is an offence under IHL NOT to prevent genocide and war crimes and the UK is under a legal obligation to take steps within its power to do so, and to do nothing to support genocide.
The UK is currently enacting and enforcing legislation (extensions to anti-terror, and anti-protest legislation) that penalises those who demonstrate non-violently in support of IHL, and gives comfort to those who abuse IHL.
Keir Starmer is a dishonest, intolerant repressive authoritarian bully.
That’s how he came to lead Labour.
That’s how he ran Labour as leader in opposition.
That’s how many of us expected him to run his government.
We were right.
That’s how he runs the PLP.
His Home Secretary is cut from the same cloth.
It’s time the PLP woke up.
Agreed
The recent widening of the terror laws – under both governments seem to give police almost unlimited powers – to confiscate anyone’s phones or other devices – even if they don’t make an immediate arrest. That could ruin someone’s career. A protest only has to be ‘annoying’ it seems to be stopped.’,
On most of the London Gaza demos I’ve been on over two years the police have been notable few and pretty relaxed. The protests have been passionate but peaceful and some with tens of thousands attending.
Presumably front line police , like this one might be pretty ignorant on ‘political crimes’ and may genuinely think that ‘free Palestine’ is supporting a terror group.
That is the danger of such (deliberately?) careless drafting of terror laws.
As far as the Met Police are concerned, Rowley has met with all the Zionist organisations, and not the Jewish anti/Zionist organisations. One Jewish Israeli lady his being ‘interviewed’ for linking the words Nazi and Israel verbally and on a poster. Jewish anti/Zionist bloc members are routinely harassed when they demonstrate. We are on a knife-edge here, all courtesy of largess from Israel, in the case of the Home Secretary, six-figure largesse.
Former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert has also been linking Nazi references with his criticisms of the Israeli government plans to set up what Olmert has called “concentration camps” in Rafah.
So she is not alone.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-said-to-warn-against-gaza-humanitarian-city-ex-pm-brands-it-concentration-camp/
(Note the source – The Times of Israel)
Well said Richard …..I agree with everything you have said and how awful in our country that people who care are being threatened. I care about people all over the world who are unfairly treated. The world needs more people who will stand up and be counted. I am a Christian who believes in justice.
Skwawkbox of16th July features verbatim observation of judge which condemns as unlawful police abuse of Palestinian Action proscription to harrass other protesters.
https://skwawkbox.org/2025/07/16/police-abuse-of-pal-action-proscription-to-harass-other-protesters-already-ruled-unlawful-by-judge/
Mike French
The purpose is to harass people who want to make a protest. The police will threaten people with arrest when they know they haven’t got a legal leg to stand on. It makes people think twice about putting themselves in situations where they could be in conflict with the police so there are less people for the police to manage. The next step up is when they charge a protester so that restrictive bail conditions can be imposed with the full intention of dropping the charges at the last minute. It’s been used against pickets for decades
Agreed
Quite right. It’s sheer harassment, and playing to the media. There is no way these arrests would ever get past the Crown Prosecution, and would certainly be thrown out of court if it ever got that far.
Not wishing to unnecessarily add to your moderation of this forum but in this case I feel it is important to say:-
My real name is as above.
I unequivocally support the sentiments expressed in your original post.
Thanks
Thanks
I also support Palestinians.
I also think Palestine should be free.
I also think Gaza and the occupied West Bank should be freed from Israeli control.
I also believe Israel is committing genocide.
I believe the UK government, specifically the prime minister, home secretary and foreign secretary now have their backs to the wall and are panicking. Notwithstanding any ludicrous laws they choose to pass, such as the proscribing mentioned, they will be held accountable for their complicity. I hope. They will at least be given short shrift in any future elections. I also support Francesca Albanese, alongside whose moral courage Starver is an insignificant worm.
I always comment under my real name.
I learnt about the video Ms Merton filmed via a link given by Canterbury resident and distinguished journalist Patrick Cockburn in an article for the i newspaper on 18th. Extraordinarily bad interpretation of draconian legislation. Thank you to your contributor for the link to the thoughtful LRB article.