Just Stop Oil - A conglomerate of unwashed, pseudoscience-pedalling, virtue-signalling, middle-class cunts.

See I have the displeasure of knowing someone involved in this group. Basically they are a grade a hypocrite all the levels. He keeps on posting spam about it on social media, making silly cult like claims that we will be dead in xxx years and nobody is listening to the so called "emergency"

In reality he is a failed student, lives off his rich dad and until last year went abroad several times a year and had a stink working in Dubai.

Most hypocritical person ever. They all are
 
something something to this effect
1668870809864.png
 
The Telegraph:

Just Stop Oil should be a proscribed terror group like Islamic State and National Action, says MP​


'These people are not protesters, they are criminals. Will the PM therefore consider making Just Stop Oil a proscribed organisation'

Just Stop Oil should be considered a terror group like Islamic State or National Action, a Conservative MP has said.

Former minister Gareth Johnson called for the Prime Minister to consider making the eco mob a "proscribed organisation" as he argued "these people are not protesters, they are criminals".

During Prime Minister's Questions yesterday, the former lawyer and justice minister criticised the environmental activist group for blocking the Dartford Crossing in his constituency last month and "causing chaos for days".

The Tory MP asked Rishi Sunak if he would consider proscribing the group "so that they can be treated as the criminal organisation they actually are".

There are currently 78 terrorist organisations proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000 in the UK and 14 organisations in Northern Ireland that were proscribed under previous legislation.

They include groups such as Islamic State, al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab, Boko Haram, far Right group National Action and the IRA.

Asked to support Mr Johnson's call to add Just Stop Oil to that list, the Prime Minister said police have the Government's full support in dealing with "the kinds of demonstrations we have seen recently".

Under the Terrorism Act 2000, the Home Secretary may proscribe an organisation if they believe it is concerned in terrorism, and it is proportionate to do.

In the last couple of months, Just Stop Oil has been using civil resistance and direct action as part of its campaign to stop future gas and oil projects from going ahead.

The MP for Dartford said: "Last month Just Stop Oil clambered up the Dartford Crossing, causing chaos for days. They then attacked artworks, the M25 and anything else to cause misery and mayhem.

"These people are not protesters, they are criminals. Will the Prime Minister therefore consider making Just Stop Oil a proscribed organisation so that they can be treated as the criminal organisation they actually are?"

Mr Sunak replied: "The kinds of demonstrations we have seen recently disrupt people's daily lives, they cause mass misery for the public and they put people in danger.

"The police have our full support in their efforts to minimise this disruption and tackle reckless and illegal activity.

"The Public Order Bill will give them the powers they need."

What is a proscribed organisation?​

Under the Terrorism Act 2000, the Home Secretary may proscribe an organisation if they believe it is concerned in terrorism, and it is proportionate to do. For the purposes of the Act, this means that the organisation:
  • commits or participates in acts of terrorism
  • prepares for terrorism
  • promotes or encourages terrorism (including the unlawful glorification of terrorism)
  • is otherwise concerned in terrorism

What is meant by ‘terrorism’ in the proscription context?​

"Terrorism" as defined in the Act, means the use or threat of action which: involves serious violence against a person; involves serious damage to property; endangers a person’s life (other than that of the person committing the act); creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or section of the public or is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.

The use or threat of such action must be designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and must be undertaken for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.

What determines whether proscription is proportionate?​

If the statutory test is met, the Home Secretary will consider whether to exercise their discretion to proscribe the organisation. In considering whether to exercise this discretion, the Home Secretary will take into account other factors, including:
  • the nature and scale of an organisation’s activities
  • the specific threat that it poses to the UK
  • the specific threat that it poses to British nationals overseas
  • the extent of the organisation’s presence in the UK
  • the need to support other members of the international community in the global fight against terrorism.

Chief constable 'truly sorry' for journalist's arrest​

A chief constable has told a journalist wrongly arrested while covering Just Stop Oil protests he is "truly sorry" for his officers' actions.

Charlie Hall, who leads Hertfordshire Police, wrote to LBC reporter Charlotte Lynch admitting "on this occasion we clearly got things wrong".

The force was heavily criticised after Ms Lynch described being handcuffed and left in a cell on suspicion of conspiracy to commit public nuisance - despite showing officers officially recognised media accreditation.

She had been reporting on the activists from a road bridge over junction 21 of the M25, in Hertfordshire, for around 45 minutes on November 8 when she was approached and questioned by two officers.

Documentary-maker Rich Felgate and photographer Tom Bowles were arrested the day before for trying to capture footage of the activists.

A fourth journalist who has not been publicly named was also arrested on November 7 on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. No further details were available.

Mr Bowles said on Twitter he has also received an apology from the force.

Amid outrage, and senior officers as well as the Prime Minister emphasising the importance of press freedom, Chief Superintendent Jon Hutchinson, from Cambridgeshire Police, was called in to review the force's actions.

Mr Hall's letter said: "He ultimately concludes that your arrest was not justified and that changes in training and command need to be made.

"The review, however, found no evidence to indicate that officers engaged maliciously or deliberately behaved in a manner which fell below that expected of police officers.

"I fully accept, however, that we made mistakes we should not have made."

He added: "Whilst policing public order incidents is fraught with difficulty and there was no malicious intent from my officers, on this occasion we clearly got things wrong.

"I recognise the significant impact that an arrest can have, and on behalf of my organisation I am truly sorry.

"I hope the actions we have taken indicate how seriously we have taken this matter and our clear intent to prevent this from happening again in the future."

The review found the officers were directed to make an arrest and did not establish sufficient grounds for doing so.

It said: "The interaction of officers suggest that arrest was the likely outcome regardless of the information obtained."
The review said the officers lacked understanding of the role of journalists.

"The JSO (Just Stop Oil) activity spanned at least four other police forces, none of whom arrested members of the press," it found.

The force has carried out a review to make sure all public order officers have undergone awareness training about the work of the media, and an assessment of the number and experience of its public order commanders.

It is also bringing in measures to make sure commanders have access to public order advisers and mentors when carrying out operations.

Article


Just Stop Oil protesters boosted Van Gogh painting's value with glue stunt, court told​


Defence barrister's claim fails to convince judge as Emily Brocklebank and Louis McKechnie found guilty of criminal damage

Two Just Stop Oil protesters who glued themselves to a Vincent Van Gogh painting may have increased the value of the artwork, their lawyer suggested.

Emily Brocklebank, 24, and Louis McKechnie, 22, were found guilty of causing just under £2,000 of criminal damage to the picture's frame on Tuesday.

During the trial, a lawyer defending the pair said the protest may actually have increased the value of the artwork, a claim experts dismissed.

Westminster Magistrates' Court heard the activists used super glue to attach themselves to Van Gogh's 1889 work Peach Trees In Blossom at the Courtauld Gallery, on the Strand, London, on June 30.

CCTV footage showed the activists walking in the building at about 3.30pm after purchasing tickets for an exhibition.
They then took off their jackets to reveal orange Just Stop Oil T-shirts and attached themselves to the artwork.

Giving evidence, McKechnie had argued: "I believe that a completely logical person who is not a psychopath who owns a painting of this value by Vincent Van Gogh would have respected the artist's wishes.

"He said himself that the art of nature is not as valuable as nature itself."

Francesca Cociani, defending the pair, then questioned Karen Serres, a curator at the gallery.

She said: "It's possible that this very painting has now increased in value because of the protest it was subject to by the defendants.

"Say the institute was to sell it on in 20 to 30 years, is it possible its value would now increase?"

Ms Serres replied: "Absolutely not."

The curator told the court it took three hours for the activists to be removed, with the incident lasting until after closing time.

She said: "There were concerns over how much of the glue had seeped into the frame and the painting itself."

There were also worries about the solvent used by police to remove the activists, the court heard.

Ms Serres said the frame, worth around £20,000, dates back to the 18th century.

Sentencing the pair, District Judge Neeta Minhas said: "An 18th century frame which is hundreds of years old has been permanently damaged. It is not in a state where it can return to its original state."

She added: "The painting has significant, historical and art value and I consider the damage to be substantial. It is not minor, insignificant, temporary or trivial."

Brocklebank, from Yeadon, Leeds, who appeared in person, and McKechnie, from Weymouth, Dorset, who appeared in custody from HMP Peterborough, had denied the charges.

McKechnie was jailed for three weeks. Brocklebank received a three-week sentence, suspended for six months. She was also given an electronically monitored six-week curfew.

Article
 
During the trial, a lawyer defending the pair said the protest may actually have increased the value of the artwork, a claim experts dismissed.
It boggles the mind a lawyer actually unironically said this thinking it was correct. There is no fucking way damaging a painting and being a faggot around it increases the value of it. Glad the judge didn't agree and sentenced the retards to jail time.
 
It boggles the mind a lawyer actually unironically said this thinking it was correct. There is no fucking way damaging a painting and being a faggot around it increases the value of it. Glad the judge didn't agree and sentenced the retards to jail time.
I love how in that video that pink haired tranny-looking fuck is like "oh yeah it was all covered in glass anyway, we didnt do anything at all!" which is now just a blatant pile of cack.

I hope they both succumb to the prison shank of a deranged crackhead during their stint in HMP.
 
It boggles the mind a lawyer actually unironically said this thinking it was correct. There is no fucking way damaging a painting and being a faggot around it increases the value of it.

Well, the defending QC does have a duty to try his hardest to get his client off, so he will try all kinds of stupid things(especially in "lost cause" cases like this one).

With respect to the argument forwarded, there is some truth to it, in that a work of art which survived a major event of historical importance  may increase in value (for example, any painting which survived the fire at the Louvre). This is especially true if there are multiple copies of the work of art.

Problem with applying this here is that the event was not of any real significance - nobody is going to remember JSO and their shit in 20 years' time except for the people who got nicked.

Any possible appreciation in value also has to be weighed against the immediate, provable degradation of the artwork caused by the antics of the philistines involved.

Nice try, but no cigar.
 
I’m aware that I’m seven pages late, but I’m surprised how no one (aside from Kiwi Farms and 4chan) notices that this could describe all these so-called “social justice” movements of the 2010’s.
SJW is still very much a thing. Both the SJW and JSO are who the Chinese may call 白左 (báizuǒ) - "white left" - and "empty" can be implied by the 白 there. The can also sarcastically be called a 聖母 (shèngmǔ) - "holy mother" - beacuse of the virtue signalling.
 
It boggles the mind a lawyer actually unironically said this thinking it was correct. There is no fucking way damaging a painting and being a faggot around it increases the value of it. Glad the judge didn't agree and sentenced the retards to jail time.
What Banksy and Damien Hirst does to a MF society at large.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Product Placement
Speaking of slebs, I wonder what chris packham thinks of all this. He was all in on XR and its spin-offs a few years ago, but he's gone absolutely silent on the subject since mid-2021.
It seems he's concentrating on sperging about his autism these days, and I think "I'm very obsessional and single-minded, I have an aggravated sense of injustice, if I think something is wrong and needs fixing and I want to fix it." is his attempt to play the autism card on that.
One of the good contributions of the Farms is providing documentation that autism is not a "superpower", but a disabling condition that needs careful management (Louis Theroux's autism documentary does this too). Most of them are unemployed because they're hard tards to wrangle.
 
@Useful_Mistake

I'm glad someone finally acknowledged that these people are effectively terrorists. All terrorism entails is taking violent disruptive action then promising more violent disruptive action if their demands are not meant. There is no exception in that definition for "but it's for a good cause uwu" because everybody thinks they're the good guys. This may seem like sophistry but it is important to recognize these Weather Underground knockoffs as the terrorists they are so their demands are thrown in the trash where they belong. Remember, the primary threat to acceding to terrorism is not the damage to life or limb, nor is it the wound to the target nation's pride. The threat from terrorism comes from the fact that if the target nation accedes to their demands even once, it sends a signal to anyone with a bomb and a message that all they must do to get their message out there is to kill enough people. It makes any civilian in the area a valid target, as terrorists now know they will achieve concessions through violence. Frankly there's an argument to be made for retaliating against terrorism with even more brutality and violence than the original attack, as rhe only way to really assure safety from these people is to inflict such a level of atrocity on them in retribution that it would be unthinkable for them to do so again.

Sigh. If only it was still acceptable to turn the firehose on these people.
 
It boggles the mind a lawyer actually unironically said this thinking it was correct. There is no fucking way damaging a painting and being a faggot around it increases the value of it. Glad the judge didn't agree and sentenced the retards to jail time.
Activist lawyers don't care about the law (yes I know all lawyers are scum, but activist lawyers in particular) or making sensible claims, they exist purely to gum up the system as much as possible, dragging these cases out as long as possible and wasting everyones time and money.
 
It boggles the mind a lawyer actually unironically said this thinking it was correct. There is no fucking way damaging a painting and being a faggot around it increases the value of it. Glad the judge didn't agree and sentenced the retards to jail time.

They probably had this particular Banksy stunt in mind [archive], in which the artist built a shredder into the bottom of a picture frame, to destroy the painting "in case it was ever put up for auction" - although the auctioneer's reaction in the video tells me he was 100% in on the prank. Banksy no doubt intended for it to get "stuck" halfway instead of shredding it completely.

The intact painting was sold for $1.4 million. 3 years later, the partially shredded version was resold for $25.4 million at the same auction house, which describes the painting's partial destruction as an act of art creation. Emphasis mine:
“It has been a whirlwind to follow the journey of this now legendary piece and to have it back in our midst, offering it tonight in the very room it was created by the artist,” said Alex Branczik, Sotheby’s chairman of modern and contemporary art.

The fact that a reputable auction house is saying this might be a sign of how far the institutional capture has gone. But it's not hard to imagine how a major news story involving a famous painting would make the painting even more famous and therefore increase its value.

Note that this does not require that the original artwork to be destroyed, or even damaged. And yes, damage to the frame counts as damage. And furthermore, an increase to an original artwork's value does not make the damage any less criminal. If I broke into your house and poured molten gold on your rare comic book collection, it would probably increase the collection's value. But you'd have every right to press charges against the crazy fuck who destroyed every comic book within it.

At least the Banksy stunt did prove that the frame is an integral part of the artwork, which has been the case for much of the pre-Modern era, but seems to have been less of a thing post-1900.

Anyway, the group are now threatening to start slashing paintings:
Just Stop Oil considers slashing famous artworks as it threatens to 'escalate' protests
The controversial climate activists have issued a call to England captain Harry Kane to wear an armband carrying their message at the World Cup in Qatar.
By David Mercer
View original

Just Stop Oil demonstrators are considering slashing famous works of art as they threaten to "escalate" their protests.

The controversial climate activists have also issued a call to England captain Harry Kane to wear an armband carrying their message at the World Cup in Qatar.

The group is planning more disruption in the run-up to Christmas in its campaign of direct action, which has included blocking roads, spraying orange paint on buildings and defacing famous artworks.

Among the protests, demonstrators have thrown soup at Van Gogh's Sunflowers painting and glued themselves to the frames of several masterpieces, prompting one art critic to brand them "morons".

Alex De Koning, a spokesman for Just Stop Oil, said it was "insane" that "more people are outraged" about the activists targeting artwork than the devastating floods in Pakistan, which displaced millions of people.

The 24-year-old - who describes himself as a "climate scientist" - told Sky News that the protest group may follow in the footsteps of suffragettes who "violently slashed paintings in order to get their messages across".

In 1914, Mary Richardson attacked Diego Velazquez's painting The Rokeby Venus with a meat cleaver in a protest against the arrest of Emmeline Pankhurst.

Later that year, suffragette Anne Hunt entered the National Portrait Gallery and hacked away at a painting of Thomas Carlyle, one of the gallery's trustees.

Mr De Koning said targeting famous art had "marked an escalation" in Just Stop Oil's action and warned it will "continue to escalate unless the government meets our demand" to stop future gas and oil projects.

He told Sky News: "If things need to escalate then we're going to take inspiration from past successful movements and we're going to do everything we can.

"If that's unfortunately what it needs to come to, then that's unfortunately what it needs to come to.

"We're fighting for our lives, why would we do any less?"

Asked directly whether future protests could involve slashing artwork, the spokesman replied: "It could potentially come to that at one point in the future, yeah."

'Not intimidated by jail'

Two Just Stop Oil activists, Hannah Hunt and Eden Lazarus, are due to face trial on Tuesday accused of causing criminal damage to John Constable's The Hay Wain.

The pair glued themselves to the frame of the painting and attached their own image of an "apocalyptic vision of the future".

Last week, a Just Stop Oil protester was jailed for gluing himself to the frame of a Van Gogh painting in a London gallery.

A judge said the 18th-century frame had been "permanently damaged" by the stunt, as Louis McKechnie was imprisoned for three weeks and fellow activist Emily Brocklebank received a 21-day sentence, suspended for six months.

Mr De Koning said Just Stop Oil activists were "not going to be intimidated by potential prison time".

"At least in prison you get three meals a day and shelter and water," he said.

"In 20 years' time, who knows if that's still the case for millions of people."

Why are protesters targeting art - and are they gaining support?

Climate activists have been targeting famous artworks around the world in recent months.

In Germany, demonstrators threw mashed potatoes at Monet's Les Meules painting in a protest against fossil fuel extraction.

And in Australia, two climate activists were arrested after gluing themselves to the frame of Picasso's Massacre in Korea.

After Just Stop Oil activists threw soup at the Van Gogh painting, art critic Waldemar Januszczak branded the stunt "pathetic".

"Take it out on the oil companies you morons, not on innocent art," he wrote on Twitter.

However musician and activist Bob Geldof voiced his support for the protesters, saying their actions were "1,000% right" and it was "clever" to deface the famous 1888 painting while it was covered with a glass screen.

Mr De Koning said the stunt had "sparked international conversations" and the protests targeting artworks were "probably" more effective than blocking roads.

"It really got a lot of people talking about the climate crisis in a way that other protests in the past have not done," the PhD student at Newcastle University said.

"We've tried protesting outside the Chinese embassy and doing other things and it just doesn't get coverage.

"Because there was no damage (to the Van Gogh painting), there was a lot of support that actually came out as well as a lot of controversy."

Who is organising the worldwide art protests?

Mr De Koning refused to say who first suggested climate protesters should target works of art, saying he couldn't discuss it for "legal reasons".

The groups involved, including Germany's Last Generation and Just Stop Oil in the UK, operate independently and no one person is believed to be directing the actions.

According to TIME, clinical psychologist Margaret Klein Salamon is perhaps the closest thing to a global mastermind of the protests.

She is the executive director of a group called The Climate Emergency Fund (CEF), which distributes money from wealthy donors to "support disruptive protest".

She told the magazine that the CEF does not fund anything illegal with its grants, which generally range from $35,000 (£29,000) to $80,000 (£67,000).

But Ms Salamon added that disruptive protests are like a fire alarm to "shake us awake".

"Playing by the rules, going step by step through normalcy, we're walking off a cliff," she said.

Just Stop Oil considers 'new tactics'

Asked whether the activists felt any guilt over defacing art, Mr De Koning said: "It's obviously terrible. Yes, of course, we don't want to be doing things like that.

"The question you need to be asking is why on earth would students, grandparents, engineers, doctors, nurses, do something like that? It's because our government is behaving criminally."

He added that if action isn't taken to stop new oil and gas projects then "millions more people are going to die and can't appreciate that artwork".

"We're not even going to have a habitable planet for this artwork and for us to live on," Mr De Koning said.

The Just Stop Oil spokesman confirmed more disruption is planned in the run-up to Christmas, saying it would be "mostly road blocking" but it was "always good to have new tactics".

The group has said it will stop its direct action if the government announces it will immediately halt all future licences for the exploration and production of fossil fuels in the UK.

Call for Kane to wear Just Stop Oil armband

Just Stop Oil has now urged Harry Kane to wear a captain's armband displaying its message at the World Cup in Qatar, which has one of the world's largest natural gas reserves and oil reserves.

Kane was due to wear a OneLove armband in support of the LGBT+ community at the World Cup - with homosexuality illegal in Qatar - but England abandoned the plan after FIFA threatened to book players who wore it.

Mr De Koning said: "A lot of people really respect Harry Kane... so a lot of people would be swayed by (him wearing a Just Stop Oil armband)."

The spokesman pointed out that Gary Lineker tweeted a message about Just Stop Oil after a protester disrupted a Premier League match and Formula One star Lewis Hamilton defended the activists after they invaded the Silverstone track during the British Grand Prix.

"These people have such a platform they can use so I would ask them to consider their responsibilities to future generations and do something as simple as put on an armband," the Just Stop Oil spokesman said.

"It's not going to make a massive difference to (Kane's) everyday life but it could have a great effects for people down the line."
[Link, Archive]

The article is long, and reiterates a lot of things we already knew. But it does contain some pithy quotes from the group's unofficial spokesman Alex De Koning - a self-styled "comedy magician" and chemical engineering student, according to his Facebook page.

He calls on football star Harry Kane to be the group's spokesman. Activist little shits always demand that celebrities use their "platform" to promote their cause. I suppose it was only a matter of time.
"These people have such a platform they can use so I would ask them to consider their responsibilities to future generations and do something as simple as put on an armband," the Just Stop Oil spokesman said.

Margaret Klein Salamon is mentioned in passing as "perhaps the closest thing to a global mastermind of the protests"
According to TIME, clinical psychologist Margaret Klein Salamon is perhaps the closest thing to a global mastermind of the protests.

She is the executive director of a group called The Climate Emergency Fund (CEF), which distributes money from wealthy donors to "support disruptive protest".

She told the magazine that the CEF does not fund anything illegal with its grants, which generally range from $35,000 (£29,000) to $80,000 (£67,000).

But Ms Salamon added that disruptive protests are like a fire alarm to "shake us awake".

"Playing by the rules, going step by step through normalcy, we're walking off a cliff," she said.

As for the actual subject of the headline, that came from the magician/spokesman Alex De Koning. At one point, he compares his group to the Suffragettes (who, notably, slashed paintings in the National Gallery to get what they wanted). When asked if JSO would do the same, the spokesman replied: "It could potentially come to that at one point in the future, yeah."

Note that he only said that when a journalist prompted him to say it. Not to let him off the hook entirely for what he said (he is clearly an attention-starved wannabe celebrity like our friend Louise), but I still find it incredibly concerning that the papers are not only taking these groups seriously but are using column inches to amplify their demands, instead of dismissing them with the ridicule they deserve.

Every victory that these self-important pricks have achieved so far has been handed to them by journalists desperate to push an environmental disaster narrative.
 
Dating her is "like losing the battle of Stalingrad"? Does that mean she dates Nazis? 🤔

No.

The last verse is about dating men. Keep in mind who'd be the Nazi here.
I guess the reason that I'm mad
Is all the boys I've ever had
Are just really fucking bad, dating men is like
Losing the Battle of Stalingrad,
dating men is like
Losing your cherry as an undergrad, dating men is like
Spotify with the ads, dating men is like
 
I feel bad for Roger Allam, having to almost share a name with this fucking wook who gives me the nonce vibes and glows so hard you could see him from space. He's a decent actor and singer and seems like a normal person. Also he is fat and I would have sex with him.
 
The Telegraph:

Just Stop Oil set to unleash campaign of Christmas chaos targeting central London roads​


Rishi Sunak is to host a meeting with police later this week in order to find out what more powers they need to deal with demonstrators

Just Stop Oil activists are planning to launch a campaign of Christmas chaos on Monday by targeting roads across central London, police have warned.

Protesters are expected to unleash a fresh wave of disruption which will see them blocking major roundabouts, glueing themselves to the tarmac and marching slowly in front of traffic.

The new tactics will see the group return to central London after last month's focus on the M25 motorway. The daily disruption is expected to begin today and last until at least December 14.

Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, is to host a meeting with police chiefs later this week, in order to find out what more powers they need in order to tackle the protesters more effectively.

A briefing document circulated among Just Stop Oil activists urges them to target rush hour and “march as slowly as possible from key roundabouts in multiple teams and timed phases”.

They are also advised to make life difficult for the police by moving from location to location and “locking on” where possible with glue, chains and bicycle D-locks.

It is likely to result in widespread frustration among motorists, who face being trapped in gridlock in the busy build up to Christmas.

The disruption is also coming at the same time as many commuters could be forced onto the roads to avoid planned rail strikes.

But the Metropolitan Police is urging people not to take matters into their own hands if they are impacted by the group’s actions.

Commander Karen Findlay said: “I completely understand the frustration and anger felt by the public who are seriously disrupted by a relatively small number of protesters and their deliberate tactics.”

But she added: “Where activists cross the line into criminality, the Met will provide a proportionate policing response. We will arrive quickly, deal with the situation efficiently, remove and arrest activists as appropriate and return things to normal as soon as possible. Please do not take matters into your own hands.”

Police have vowed to respond “quickly and effectively” to any incidents, but it is feared there will still be considerable disruption for millions of people.

This week Mr Sunak will host a summit meeting in Downing Street with Suella Braverman, the home secretary, Chris Philp, the police minister and a handful of top ranking police chiefs to discuss the response to Just Stop Oil protesters.

Mr Sunak has called for the guidance issued to frontline officers by the College of Policing to be updated to reflect the additional powers afforded to the police under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, and set out clearly how the police should use these powers.

“He is not happy that not enough is being done to prevent Just Stop Oil's protests,” a Government source said. “Over the past few weeks he has continuously seen this disruption happening and has been really frustrated with it.”

Mr Sunak and Ms Braverman will use the meeting to ask police chiefs what new powers they need to better tackle Just Stop Oil protesters, and whether they have any ideas about what could be done differently.

Officials in the Department for Transport are also examining whether “beefed up” injunctions could be sought to limit the disruption.

National Highways successfully applied for injunctions during the previous round of protests on the M25 and Government figures believe a similar approach could help blunt the impact of the demonstrations.

But a Whitehall source admitted that injunctions could only go so far in deterring protesters who were “hell bent” on causing mayhem.

“We could have the strongest injunction in the world and these people will still go out and cause disruption,” they said. “That’s why we also need strong and prompt enforcement of the law by the police.”

Previous protests by Extinction Rebellion led to widespread criticism of the police, who were accused of being slow to respond and showing the activists too much respect.

But Ms Findlay said the Met was prepared to meet the challenge head on and said: “We have a very experienced team with robust policing measures in place to respond quickly and effectively to any incidents of serious disruption to London.

“We also have specialist officers available to deal with a range of tactics including sophisticated lock-on devices.”

But last night a spokesman for Just Stop Oil said there was little the government or police could do to deter them from taking action to prevent the “climate emergency” and likened their struggle to that of the Suffragettes.

The spokesman said: “It matters little what changes legislators make to the laws on peaceful protest or how strongly the police enforce those laws.

“Just Stop Oil supporters understand that this is irrelevant when set against mass starvation, slaughter, the loss of our rights, freedoms and communities. Just Stop Oil is not a fashionable cause or a protest movement.

These so-called “eco-zealots” are people in resistance and they are doing what the Suffragettes did and what the Civil Rights movements did.”

Article


Just Stop Oil recruit army of new activists for fresh wave of protests​


The protest group are not in action on Tuesday, but will be back disrupting on Wednesday in first disruption stunts since Nov 10

Just Stop Oil has recruited an army of activists for a fresh wave of protests targeting London in the build-up to Christmas.

On Monday, demonstrators walked slowly in the middle of roads in the capital in their latest stunt, but the group are not out on Tuesday because "it was never part of the plan".

Asked if the day off was due to their dwindling numbers or an attempt to get the public on side, a spokesman for Just Stop Oil said: "Many of those who are taking action this week are taking their first steps in civil resistance.

"Support for Just Stop Oil’s demand is growing after our six week campaign of actions in the capital during October and November."

This week's actions are the first from the group since Nov 10, which marked the end of six weeks of continuous disruption.

Just Stop Oil will return to London on Wednesday.

A spokesman for the group said: "No action today. This was never part of our plan. We'll be back in action again tomorrow."

During this period, the police made more than 700 arrests and since the group's campaign began on Apr 1, Just Stop Oil supporters have been arrested over 2,000 times, with 27 supporters currently in prison.

It has left organisers having to rethink their strategies.

In previous weeks, protesters climbed gantries on the M25, and it is understood they planned to use this tactic further afield.

But owing to the training required, when the activists were brought down from above the motorways and arrested, with some remanded in custody.

Dartford Crossing pair facing trial​

This was the case with the two men accused of climbing a bridge in a Just Stop Oil protest that closed the Dartford Crossing for two days in October.

Drivers were unable to use the Queen Elizabeth II Bridge, which links Kent and Essex, after it was blocked when two demonstrators mounted its cables with climbing equipment.

Marcus Decker, 33, of no fixed address, appeared by prison videolink at Basildon Crown Court on Tuesday where he denied causing a public nuisance between Oct 16 and 19.

Morgan Trowland, 39, of Islington, north London, did not attend the hearing but the court was told he had indicated a plea of not guilty.

The pair are alleged to have displayed a Just Stop Oil banner from the bridge.

Judge Shane Collery KC said they will stand trial from March 27, giving a time estimate of seven days.

He said a pre-trial review will take place on Mar 13.


Just Stop Oil back out tomorrow​


The group will head back out to London on Wednesday after the frustrating scenes on Monday where Met Police officers walking alongside the activists had no power to act, according to a chief inspector.

As the farcical scenes unfolded, Ch Insp Billy Bowen-Long, who helps to lead public order planning for the force, admitted the protest was lawful so officers could not intervene.

Asked whether it had been a good use of police resources, he told MailOnline: "Well it's what we have to do given the intelligence we've got.

"It's an intensive resource but that's where we are at the moment. Weighed up against all the violent crime then no I wouldn't say so.

"We police the law as it is and we have to provide an appropriate response to that, which is what we've done today."
Over the weekend, Scotland Yard had spoken firmly of taking strong action against the protest group, insisting it would respond swiftly and decisively to tackle any unlawful demonstrations.

A Just Stop Oil spokesman said: "People are rightly are asking themselves what is a proportionate response to the absolute betrayal of humanity presided over by our leaders at Cop27?

"Our supporters understand what many have not yet grasped - that no-one is coming to save us.

"As a result they are stepping up to do whatever is nonviolently possible to resist this government’s genocidal policies.
"The government can end the disruption today by announcing an end to new oil and gas licences and consents."

Article


Watch: Just Stop Oil bombarded with abuse by angry pedestrians​


Officers make no arrests at protest with one saying 'they're walking down the highway and we're facilitating them'

“It's the police – they’re not doing anything!” shouted a pensioner stranded at a bus stop in north London amid a mass tailback caused by the latest Just Stop Oil protest on Wednesday.

As two officers strolled indifferently past her, a red mist descended on her friend.

“You might not have something better to do with your life but we do, so f---off. Get off the streets,” the fur-coated pensioner yelled at the 11 eco activists, clutching a shopping bag while waving her middle finger and walking stick around.

The volley of expletives in Islington, coming from such ostensibly mild-mannered passers-by, left the environmental group stunned – and the police could only laugh.

Islington locals, not exactly known for their conservative credentials, had little time for the climate group’s chaos, with pedestrians just as vocal as the bus drivers and motorists.

A passing white van man shouted, “W------! Go and get a job, the lot of you!” prompting one middle-aged hi-vis protester to cry back: “We’ve got jobs!”

It marked an escalation in tensions caused by the group’s new tactic of slowly marching in a barricade along a highway, exploiting a legal loophole which avoids arrest as long as it is not deemed “serious disruption”.

In Wednesday's disruption, Just Stop Oil spent 110 minutes walking two-and-a-half miles across two lanes at the busy Highbury Corner junction and along the A1, as well as in the Barbican, just as they did on the Strand on Monday.

They caught the Metropolitan Police off guard, with van-loads arriving 20 minutes later only to walk in tow before letting them freely leave. Now, the public were turning on the police, too.

As motorists demanded answers, one of the dozens of officers explained: “They’re not doing anything wrong at the minute – they’re not obstructing the highway, it’s still moving. It could potentially [go on indefinitely].”

Another officer, asked why they were not arresting the protesters, said: “They’re walking down the highway and we’re facilitating them.”

A third police officer said: “By moving, you’re just on a protest, on a march, effectively. Unless they stop, they’re not breaking the law. The problem is the traffic can get past when the opportunity arises – it’s a proper grey area.”

It contrasted somewhat with the tough talk of Karen Findlay, the Met commander, who vowed over the weekend to “arrive quickly, deal with the situation efficiently, remove and arrest activists as appropriate”, as the group plots chaos in the run-up to Christmas.

It came as Alex De Koning, a Just Stop Oil spokesman, said the group was considering following the suffragettes who “violently slashed paintings in order to get their messages across” as it “continues to escalate” until the Government halts all gas and oil licences.

The National Gallery, well aware the group has already thrown soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers in October, said its security protocols were tough. The British Museum, meanwhile, said that it would “ensure objects and visitors are not put at risk”.

Against the din of rabid horn-beeping, one bus passenger yelled: “It’s the height of selfishness!” while another told them: “We’ve got places to be.”

As things got heated, an inspector, who had unsuccessfully tried to persuade the group to leave on safety grounds, told a yelling pedestrian: “They don’t care about what you care, they care about what they care – so it’s incredibly selfish.”

Gary Townsend, a taxi driver stuck in Islington, said his message to Just Stop Oil was “to get off the road and let people earn a living”, adding it was “a complete and utter waste of time”.

Tony Spooner, 54, a self-employed builder, said it was “disgusting” how the police were not intervening, after officers told him to “be patient” when his car bonnet brushed the protesters.

Others solemnly clapped the activists and one enthusiastic motorist even joined them, as they chanted “you can’t arrest a flood” and “you can’t beep a horn when you’re dead”.

Shaun Irish, 25, the protest ringleader, said: “I think it’s a waste of police resources. I don’t know why they’re sending so much for a peaceful protest.”

Article


Courts are failing to deter Just Stop Oil protesters, say police chiefs​


Blame game breaks out over who is responsible for the chaos, with Rishi Sunak urging the police to 'act decisively and rapidly'

The courts have failed to act as a deterrent to Just Stop Oil protesters, police chiefs said on Thursday, as a blame game broke out over who was responsible for tackling the chaos.

Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, urged the police to do more and “act decisively and rapidly to end the misery and the disruption that's being caused to ordinary families up and down the country”.

But Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, suggested it was not that simple, telling the London Assembly his officers had not been able to arrest protesters in London in recent days because they were not causing “serious delays or disruption”.

Following weeks of mounting frustration over the actions of Just Stop Oil, the Prime Minister and Home Secretary, hosted a summit in Downing Street at which police leaders insisted they required more government help to deal with the problem.

As well as asking for the Government to devise a statutory definition of “serious disruption” to clear up confusion over their powers, they said the justice system had been far too slow in dealing with those who broke the law.

Police chiefs asked the Government to consider a range of specific measures to make it easier to prevent further Just Stop Oil chaos.

Among them was the setting up of a working group to examine whether counter-terror tactics, such as how to spot suspicious characters in art galleries and museums, could be applied to prevent unlawful attacks by the group.

They also want the definition of “serious disruption” to take account of the cumulative impact of regular protests on communities.

Just Stop Oil launched a fresh wave of demonstrations earlier this week with activists marching slowly in front of traffic at various locations across the capital.

The demonstrations have caused anger among motorists, with claims the police have not tried to intervene.
But speaking to the London Assembly before the summit, Sir Mark defended his officers’ approach.

He said: “Yesterday we had a group of eight people sometimes walking on the roads, sometimes walking on the pavements, who caused almost no serious delays or disruption whatsoever.

Despite the criticism he insisted the current police approach was working because the group had become “much less assertive” in its tactics.

He said this was a consequence of a large number of their members being remanded in custody after being arrested.

But he said many of their trials had been listed for 2024 which he said was a symptom of the delays in the criminal justice system.

BJ Harrington, NPCC lead on public order, said: “It’s capacity and having dedicated resources whether that’s Nightingale courts or freeing up other courts to do that.

“We want to work with the CPS, courts and Government to make sure we can get that fair but quick justice not only for people in these criminal protests but so we are not blocking up those seeking justice elsewhere.”

Mr Sunak said on Thursday night: "This afternoon I sat down with all the police chiefs to make it clear that they have my full support in acting decisively to clamp down on illegal protests.

"It is completely unacceptable that ordinary members of the public are having their lives disrupted by a selfish minority.
"My view is that those who break the law should feel the full force of it, and that's what I am determined to deliver."

Asked whether ministers will bring in new legislation or boost powers for officers, he replied: "I've said to the police whatever they need from Government they will have in terms of new powers."

Article

Just Stop Oil's disruptive new tactics are not a victory for the police​


Officers are letting activists get away with behaviour that infuriates the public

The protesters belonging to Just Stop Oil have a new tactic to disrupt motorists trying to go about their daily business. They walk slowly in the road ahead of traffic, forcing it to crawl along at a snail’s pace. Astonishingly, they are accompanied in this endeavour by police officers. If a police presence is required because they are breaking the law, why are they not being arrested? Otherwise, why are the officers there at all? Is it to protect the walkers from irate drivers? At one point, 80 officers and six vans were deployed to watch over a handful of activists.

This is an insult to the law-abiding public and is making a mockery of the rule of law. The new strategy has been adopted because the police and courts have finally cracked down on the activists who glued themselves to the roads or climbed on to motorway gantries. Injunctions have helped the police carry out pre-emptive arrests on known trouble-makers. Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, told the London Assembly that it was a measure of “assertive” police success in stopping the previous activity that they were now resorting to slow walking. But his officers are letting them get away with it. Just a few arrests are made before the agitators regroup.

Getting a balance between legitimate protest and unlawful disruption seems to be a task beyond our legislators, law enforcers or the courts. No one wants to stop the protesters making their point; but they can do that from the pavement. Wilfully blocking the highway is supposed to be a criminal offence but apparently it does not constitute the “severe disruption” needed for the police to act. If there is doubt over what everyone imagined the law to be, then Parliament needs to end it.

Article
 
McKechnie was jailed for three weeks. Brocklebank received a three-week sentence, suspended for six months. She was also given an electronically monitored six-week curfew.

I'm still not convinced that the target institutions aren't in on it - especially the galleries - and weak legal outcomes like this seem to support the idea. Nobody reacts like a normal person confronted with this sort of thing, and everyone seems to have a big old tub of solvent specifically for the glue being used just lying about the PR Office, along with several camera people ready to go.

Reminds me of the guy who tried to scale Chase Bank and fell onto his own paint cannister: he was surrounded by blatant bank PR people filming the vandalisation of their own building as if they were directing it. Funnily enough, that full video appears to have become "lost" on YT...

black demon blood.jpg

Also, things like...

The protesters belonging to Just Stop Oil have a new tactic to disrupt motorists trying to go about their daily business. They walk slowly in the road ahead of traffic, forcing it to crawl along at a snail’s pace. Astonishingly, they are accompanied in this endeavour by police officers. If a police presence is required because they are breaking the law, why are they not being arrested? Otherwise, why are the officers there at all? Is it to protect the walkers from irate drivers? At one point, 80 officers and six vans were deployed to watch over a handful of activists.

... do little to dispel the suspicion that the whole thing is sanctioned street theatre.
 
Rishi handing the fuzz unlimited power is stupid (but not unexpected; the government, especially a tory government, always wants more power). They don't need new powers; blocking a highway is already a criminal offence. All the police need to do is enforce the existing law. If that means a few palms get ripped, well, that's the crim's own stupid fault.
 
Back