And, for clarity, I bring up the actions of who they support to demonstrate that they weren’t quite so kindly and for context. It’s an offence to support a proscribed group and that is what they were doing, so their arrests were perfectly legal. Just as it would be for any other banned group, be it Islamist or far-right. Starmer may have set in motion the banning, but when that is done, the police need to enforce the law as it stands and people are not above the law, no matter their age and how presentable they appear.
I was not speaking of the actions of PA with intent to say you support that, but to hammer home the reality of them supporting criminal thugs. I don’t intend to imply that anyone with a different view is like them. However, any criticism of Starmer should be about his decision to proscribe them, because arrests for supporting proscribed groups come from long before Starmer, but given the nature of PA I can understand why there were bans. Even if the terrorist reading may be more in contention.
