Houses Raided And Six Far-Right Group Members Arrested.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5231213/Five-men-woman-arrested-National-Action-raids.html

Have they been arrested because it is feared that they may be a threat to our safety or because they are members of a banned group?

Can't be the former because the police have insisted there is no threat to public safety.

[jno]

what the BBC says: "They were arrested on suspicion of being concerned in the commission, preparation and instigation of acts of terrorism, namely on suspicion of being a member of a proscribed organisation, National Action."

It sounds as though being a member is synonymous with being suspected of committing terrorist acts, which is a little odd.

[mikey4444]

jno...if it can be proved that they are members of this hateful organisation, then they will have broken the law....nothing terribly odd about that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Action_(UK)

Actually, hateful doesn't even come close to describing NA.

[Togo]

//what "phrase"? //
Proscribed group.......do keep up.

jno.... perhaps they were organising the printing of t-shirts, or making banners for a march? Who knows.

[jno]

to be sure, mikey, but I would have thought committing a terrorist attack would be a separate crime on its own - unless they think merely joining NA is a terrorist act, which seems an unwarranted assumption. I expect we'll know more if it comes to court.

[bednobs]

i would doubt that using proscribed instead of banned makes it any more user friendly.
Do you not have access to google or something?

[jno]

togo, the BBC report is as I said it - suspicion of committing etc acts of terror, namely suspicion of being a NA member. I've no problem with proscribing outfits like this, but I'd prefer the law to distinguish betwen thinking about terrorism and practising it.

[Islay]

They deserve to be banned - apparently they openly rejoiced at the murder of Jo Cox!

[jackthehat]

I believe the Security Services may be privvy to more information/intelligence than is available to the general public; hence the arrests.

I don't mind, in the least, if radical groups such as NA are proscribed, banned, etc.

[Togo]

How do you feel about say...... far left or communist believers being designated proscribed jth?

[jackthehat]

If the fear is that they are planning similar sorts of 'outrages' based on their political viewpoint.....ban/proscribe them, too.

[Togo]

That was tried in 1930 jth, not of course on a parliamentary or law of the land basis but tried nevertheless by a British political party. Go on guess who was proscribed and by whom. Haha careful what you wish for. I notice Gromit has "disappeared" without an attempt at answering direct questions....... It was worth my asking them then.

[jackthehat]

Perhaps 80 years on from then we are wiser to the machinations of various 'groups' who declare that they are working in the interests of, basically, those who support them?

[sp1814]

Togo

Perhaps Gromit is having his dinner.

Don't know the answer to your question. Couldn't even make an educated guess.

Further reading, which may answer some of your questions about the current state of affairs:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/670599/20171222_Proscription.pdf

[Togo]

Matter of opinion there jth. This proscribed group is still with us and has support even here on the Bank. Even though, that for 40 years of being designated a proscribed set of people at a party level, by a major British political party, strangely not subsequently on the list of proscribed groups introduced in 2000 at legislative level by the same party . They just liked the word you see.... fits the lexicon of deceit. Careful what you wish for.

[Togo]

SP
Designated Proscribed Groups introduced 2000 by Anthony Charles Blair.
First deployed in 1930 by the Labour Party to expel The Communist Party Of Great Britain from membership of the party and therefor standing for election under their umbrella in 1930. ( Look what happened then) The CPGB remained a " Proscribed Group of individuals in the Labour hand book for 40 years.
Now it is part of Blair's toxic legacy in British life for ever. I love our "democrats".

[Gromit]

Sp was correct, I was eating my tea (not dinner).

True Labour used to proscribe its own members in the 1920s and 30s but that was a different use. It did not proscribe them as terrorists, it banned them for being members of another party, namely the communists.
Not really sure why you brought that up, as it isn’t really revelent.

The modern legislation was indeed introduced in the Terrorism Act 2000, and was introduced by Labour. Again, I vaguely support proscribing, so not sure why the fact it was introduced by a Labour Government proves anything one way or the other.

[jackthehat]

Yes......AnswerBank is full of opinions.

I don't wish for anything other than for home-grown agitators to stop taking valuable time away from our Security Services.

[Gromit]

Togo,
The legislation is pretty good and useful. The Conservatives far from repealing proscribing, have used it to ban terror groups themselves.
Most of the groups that have been proscribed are Islamist terror groups, so becareful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater just because you support a nazis group.

[Spicerack]

Serves them right for not having the correct opinions.

[Togo]

//so becareful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater just because you support a nazis group. //sic.

There you go again using the smear when you refuse to hear. Have you been taking lessons from our infamous practitioner of that tactic. Taken you a while mind. Perhaps you are a "slow learner". The only thing I support is democracy.......whilst having an inbuilt contempt of cant and deceit. When I make unfortunate contact with a user of both, at the same time, I know I must be on the right track.