{"id":84074,"date":"2025-07-17T07:48:13","date_gmt":"2025-07-17T06:48:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/?p=84074"},"modified":"2025-07-17T08:46:48","modified_gmt":"2025-07-17T07:46:48","slug":"ww-have-the-right-to-use-plain-words-to-explain-plain-sentiment-in-a-plain-way","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2025\/07\/17\/ww-have-the-right-to-use-plain-words-to-explain-plain-sentiment-in-a-plain-way\/","title":{"rendered":"We have the right to use plain words to express plain sentiment in a plain way"},"content":{"rendered":"

I share this report from The Guardian<\/a> because I think it is necessary to do so:<\/p>\n

\n

Armed police threatened a peaceful protester with arrest under the Terrorism Act for holding a Palestinian flag and having signs saying \u201cFree Gaza\u201d and \u201cIsrael is committing genocide\u201d, accusing her of supporting a proscribed organisation.<\/p>\n

Officers told Laura Murton, 42, that her demonstration in Canterbury,\u00a0Kent, on Monday evening expressed views supportive of Palestine Action, which was banned under terrorism legislation earlier this month.<\/p>\n

Murton said neither of her signs mentioned Palestine Action. When asked directly whether she supported any proscribed organisations, she replied: \u201cI do not.\u201d<\/p>\n

In the encounter, which she filmed, one officer told her: \u201cMentioning freedom of Gaza, Israel, genocide, all of that all come under proscribed groups, which are terror groups that have been dictated by the government.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n
\n
\n
He went on to say that the phrase \u201cFree Gaza\u201d is \u201csupportive of Palestine Action\u201d, adding it was an offence \u201cto 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<\/a>\u201d. The officer told her she had committed that offence.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n
As the Guardian added:<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

A Kent police spokesperson said: \u201cUnder 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.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

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.<\/p>\n

This is deeply chilling for those, like me, who support free speech.<\/p>\n

So let me be clear:<\/p>\n

I support Palestinians<\/strong><\/h1>\n

I think Palestine should be free<\/strong><\/h1>\n

I think Gaza and the occupied West Bank should be freed from Israeli control<\/strong><\/h1>\n

I believe Israel is committing genocide<\/strong><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

The police know where I am, but there is no way on earth that I have committed an offence, and they know that too.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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
Read the full article…<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[215,14,16,118,106],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-84074","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-age-of-aggression","category-corruption","category-ethics","category-labour","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/84074","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=84074"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/84074\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":84086,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/84074\/revisions\/84086"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=84074"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=84074"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=84074"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}