2023 Israel - Hamas war

[Oxfordblues]

Are they hoping that Network Rail will intervene in the Middle East?

 

[Trainguy34]

What is the point of doing it in train stations, all they're doing is stopping people getting where they want to go and, from that, drawing *negative* attention.

 

[N0G83]

Liverpool Street the other day too.

They should be outside parliament, but it's hardly ever open for business.

They were in Whitehall & Parliament Sq last Saturday.

 

[Sheffcaster202]

Colleague of mine says they’re at Leeds too

 

[MCR247]

What is the point of doing it in train stations, all they're doing is stopping people getting where they want to go and, from that, drawing *negative* attention.

Funnily enough, protests that don't cause disruption are somehow less effective...

 

[Busaholic]

Funnily enough, protests that don't cause disruption are somehow less effective...

Try to protest with a couple of placards at a Coronation and you'll be hauled off to the Tower, or its modern-day equivalent, by the police. Amazing double standards.

P.S. I'm in no way suggesting that police tactics were correct at the Coronation, just pointing out the contrast.

 

[brad465]

London Charing Cross is exit only due to protesters on the concourse, unsafe for passengers to enter/access platforms.

Neither this nor any other protest-filled station is showing up on National Rail Enquiries as disruption (it's not under cleared disruptions either), despite the fact if measures have been brought in as a result of them, they are disruption. Does this mean passengers can actually go about their journey unaffected, or can NRE not currently comprehend the existence of station protests in its service disruptions?

 

[Mojo]

There was one at St Pancras on Thursday morning too.

 

[DustyBin]

Very late to this thread, but having read a bit I am curious to get some thoughts on something I've been pondering for some time. It's very, very murky ground, but can people give many examples of when ethnic partition has worked long term? It seems to have particularly been the favoured approach of the British when washing their hands of situations towards the end of empire, i.e. India, Palestine, Ireland, Malaysia, etc. and all it ever seemed to create is large amounts of displaced people and generational increased ethnic tensions. In short, I'm not sure a two-three-four or whatever state solution can ever truly work.

To that end, surely integration and multiculturalism has to be the only sustainable solution long-term? It's murky in this particular scenario because it could be construed as calling for the destruction of Israel as it is, but the intent is a suggestion for something more that is both Israel and Palestine, both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, both India and Pakistan, etc. with protections for the minority group to all have secure standing in government. Counter examples of course being things like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, et al. where despite being unified, the ethic groups didn't combine and live side by side and (in some cases following vicious conflict) were once again partitioned along ethnic lines.

I obviously don't know what the answer is, but the above has long struck me as the awkward situation we find ourselves in and I was curious to get other people's general thoughts on it.

In regard to partitioning, it was often in response to existing tensions that were boiling over as the British were leaving. Clearly in many cases it caused it’s own issues as it wasn’t properly thought through, but it was an attempt to prevent ongoing violence or even civil war.

Going back to Israel and Palestine, I can’t see any solution other than the two state one, as I don’t believe the majority of Palestinians want to live in Israel. They need their own viable, fully functioning state, which would hopefully lead to long term peace. (Israel has a fairly decent relationship with many of it’s former adversaries in the region, so there’s a precedent at least).

Finally, many people don’t appreciate that Arabs (of several denominations) make up over 20% of the population of Israel; the country isn’t entirely Jewish. In reality, despite their legal status there are issues with the treatment of Israeli Arabs, but again there’s a precedent for people managing to live alongside each other in relative peace. Strict segregation isn’t necessary or desirable in my opinion.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Hearing Charing Cross station has now been closed with 3 arrests

 

[800001]

Neither this nor any other protest-filled station is showing up on National Rail Enquiries as disruption (it's not under cleared disruptions either), despite the fact if measures have been brought in as a result of them, they are disruption. Does this mean passengers can actually go about their journey unaffected, or can NRE not currently comprehend the existence of station protests in its service disruptions?

People can gain access to stations, trains are running as normal. It may mean **some** people have to access platforms a different way to how they normally would, and yes some people will miss trains.

BTW NRE disruption pages are fed by the relevant train companies so it is up to them to put a disruption message out if they see fit.

 

[GS250]

To that end, surely integration and multiculturalism has to be the only sustainable solution long-term?

On paper yes its what we all want. However when core beliefs start to clash (as we saw in the last World Cup) then there is a problem.

 

[Robski_]

Neither this nor any other protest-filled station is showing up on National Rail Enquiries as disruption (it's not under cleared disruptions either), despite the fact if measures have been brought in as a result of them, they are disruption. Does this mean passengers can actually go about their journey unaffected, or can NRE not currently comprehend the existence of station protests in its service disruptions?

If they did try, they'd quickly find that the police wouldn't let them as they were the ones controlling the restrictions at Charing Cross. Services were still running, so it is possible that someone deemed that it would not have been appropriate for an incident to be shown on Knowledgebase/NRE. I didn't check to see if a station alert was put up on Darwin though.

Hearing Charing Cross station has now been closed with 3 arrests

The station re-opened an hour ago.

 

[MasterSpenny]

What is the point of doing it in train stations, all they're doing is stopping people getting where they want to go and, from that, drawing *negative* attention.

There is no point. Imagine wanting to go somewhere you really have to, such as a city and being greeted with protests instead.

Honestly though whoever planned these protests should be stuck in prison and anyone who engages must get a severe punishment…

Edit: disregard the last section, it would probably be too great to do justice regarding it

 

[trainmananthon]

Was working at Piccadilly today, and mainly stayed on platform 1 throughout this. We were told to protect the barrier line and not let the protesters onto the platforms, and that they were expecting up to 3,500 protestors. Last time this happened, they all got on to the tracks.

Wasn't too bad in the end, only a couple hundred turned up and stayed on the concourse, but there was a sufficient amount of them to have to think of closing the station.

 

[yorkie]

Are they hoping that Network Rail will intervene in the Middle East?

No; the purpose is to gain media attention.

I can understand why they are doing what they are doing, and they have the right to protest what is a very worthy cause, but I don't think railway stations are the best choice.

There is no point. Imagine wanting to go somewhere you really have to, such as a city and being greeted with protests instead.

Honestly though whoever planned these protests should be stuck in prison and anyone who engages must get a severe punishment…

You are either not being serious or are a bit naïve.

People can gain access to stations, trains are running as normal. It may mean **some** people have to access platforms a different way to how they normally would, and yes some people will miss trains.

Presumably memos have been sent to train crew / revenue officers to accept Advance tickets on alternative services.

 

[Andyh82]

I’m not entirely sure what the point of protesting in a provincial railway station is.

If it was a domestic issue I could possibly see the point

I can’t see anything changing in the Middle East based on a protest at Edinburgh Waverley, the only media coverage it gets is about 5 seconds in the news

 

[yorkie]

I’m not entirely sure what the point of protesting in a provincial railway station is.

If it was a domestic issue I could possibly see the point

I can’t see anything changing in the Middle East based on a protest at Edinburgh Waverley

You are missing the point, but I agree that railway stations aren't appropriate places to do this. Unfortunately doing so at stations probably does gain more media attention than doing so elsewhere.

And it is a domestic issue insofar as our Government have said inappropriate things and are backing a far-right regime which is committing war crimes.

Even Starmer isn't accepting there should be a cease fire, which is likely to cost Labour my vote at the next election (not that they would be bothered)

 

[Taunton]

Try to protest with a couple of placards at a Coronation and you'll be hauled off to the Tower, or its modern-day equivalent, by the police. Amazing double standards.

Not at all. I was actually at the Coronation crowds, there was a protester there standing prominently with multiple placards. Both police and the crowd passed them by, looked, did nothing.

 

[Mojo]

I’m not entirely sure what the point of protesting in a provincial railway station is.

If it was a domestic issue I could possibly see the point

I can’t see anything changing in the Middle East based on a protest at Edinburgh Waverley

In effect they want to put pressure on the government to change their stance, with a hope that it will lead to a change in the Middle East.

Unfortunately for us, they only seem to impact on the worst off in society rather than disrupting the movers and shakers and all that is happening are more stringent restrictions on the right to protest being applied.

 

[nw1]

What is the point of doing it in train stations, all they're doing is stopping people getting where they want to go and, from that, drawing *negative* attention.

It's not an ideal location but you can hardly blame people for protesting.

 

[Busaholic]

Not at all. I was actually at the Coronation crowds, there was a protester there standing prominently with multiple placards. Both police and the crowd passed them by, looked, did nothing.

You obviously missed all the reports about the small group of Republic supporters who were arrested, then, and the very pro-monarchy female from Australia who just happened to be standing near Just Stop Oil protestors and got detained for thirteen hours?

 

[Gloster]

Getting back to the original point. As with Just Stop Oil, causing general disruption only causes annoyance and bad publicity, particularly when you have a government as unscrupulous as the current one. The only way you can get anything done is to hit the party donors and their like in their pockets.

Demonstrations like this only provide ammunition to those who would like to further restrict the right to protest. It provides an opportunity for people like Braverman (*) to push through hastily written parliamentary bills which can later be used to inflict far greater restrictions on peaceful protest than claimed when put up Parliament.

* - Yes, I mention Braverman specifically as I suspect this is what she is after.

 

[nw1]

Yes, in war, war crimes tend to be committed. Please remind me, which side are taking hostages ?

And which side are bombing and killing innocent civilians?

Neither side is completely without blame.

 

[yorkie]

I don't think comparisons with other protests are particularly helpful; different people will have different experiences if they were at them, and if they weren't there, then it's a case of which media outlets have you read, or do you believe and then your perceptions of what was reported. I

I would far rather the protesters were protesting somewhere else; I agree with various people that railway stations are not good places to do this, but those who react in an extreme manner to these events are just not being pragmatic or realistic.

Getting back to the original point. As with Just Stop Oil, causing general disruption only causes annoyance and bad publicity, particularly when you have a government as unscrupulous as the current one. The only way you can get anything done is to hit the party donors and their like in their pockets.

It's not comparable to that; they are not stopping trains running.

It's a false equivalence.

 

[Gloster]

It's not comparable to that; they are not stopping trains running.

It's a false equivalence.

To make things clear: I don’t mean disruption in the railway sense. I mean that anybody approaching a station or trying to leave it, even if there is no hindrance, is still going to be a bit uncertain whether there will be trouble, whether when they return they will find the station closed, whether they will be stopped under the ’I don’t like the look of you‘ act, etc. Similarly, anyone seeing it on the TV may think that there is a lot of trouble and maybe it would be better to keep clear of stations/London/Manchester/etc. for a while (that is, if they are not too busy with something really important: a load of clowns prancing about). It causes upset to the even tenor of people’s life and that disquiet is transferred to the cause behind the protest.

 

[GoneSouth]

Funnily enough, protests that don't cause disruption are somehow less effective...

But protests that just stop a few people from going shopping or visiting their aunties probably will have zero effect too.

 

[yorkie]

To make things clear: I don’t mean disruption in the railway sense. I mean that anybody approaching a station or trying to leave it, even if there is no hindrance, is still going to be a bit uncertain whether there will be trouble, whether when they return they will find the station closed, whether they will be stopped under the ’I don’t like the look of you‘ act, etc. Similarly, anyone seeing it on the TV may think that there is a lot of trouble and maybe it would be better to keep clear of stations/London/Manchester/etc. for a while (that is, if they are not too busy with something really important: a load of clowns prancing about). It causes upset to the even tenor of people’s life and that disquiet is transferred to the cause behind the protest.

My understanding is that people were not prevented from travelling; it wasn't comparable to what Just Stop Oil do.

It is possible that some people missed trains; for example I entered King's Cross around 1550 yesterday and expected to be able to enter via the usual route and found I had to go a long way round (there were no protesters yet but it was all set up ready for them). If someone only allowed a short period of time to interchange, then I could see how they'd miss trains, but then I am sure the rail companies would make allowances for that and allow people to take later trains. But this isn't the same thing as someone physically blocking someone's passage, which as you say absolutely gets peoples backs up.

As I said before, drawing comparisons with different protests is problematic.

 

[Gloster]

My understanding is that people were not prevented from travelling; it wasn't comparable to what Just Stop Oil do.

It is possible that some people missed trains; for example I entered King's Cross around 1550 yesterday and expected to be able to enter via the usual route and found I had to go a long way round (there were no protesters yet but it was all set up ready for them). If someone only allowed a short period of time to interchange, then I could see how they'd miss trains, but then I am sure the rail companies would make allowances for that and allow people to take later trains. But this isn't the same thing as someone physically blocking someone's passage, which as you say absolutely gets peoples backs up.

As I said before, drawing comparisons with different protests is problematic.

It is not the number of people who missed trains or were otherwise inconvenienced that is really the problem, although these add to the impression, it is the way that it will be depicted by politicians and parts of the media as some giant riot, or a giant riot only prevented by our magnificent police force, who need ‘more powers’. That most demonstrators are peaceful and unthreatening, and it is only a small and extreme fringe who descend to antisemitism, is almost completely overlooked. It is not what happened, but what people think happened or could have happened. With a media which has (largely) not only lost its impartiality over the subject (and wants a story) and a government of which some senior members are exploiting the protests for their own political and personal ends, the general publiccis going to get a view that is far from balanced and their opinions will follow.

 

[yorkie]

It is not the number of people who missed trains or were otherwise inconvenienced that is really the problem, although these add to the impression, it is the way that it will be depicted by politicians and parts of the media as some giant riot, or a giant riot only prevented by our magnificent police force, who need ‘more powers’. That most demonstrators are peaceful and unthreatening, and it is only a small and extreme fringe who descend to antisemitism, is almost completely overlooked. It is not what happened, but what people think happened or could have happened. With a media which has (largely) not only lost its impartiality over the subject (and wants a story) and a government of which some senior members are exploiting the protests for their own political and personal ends, the general publiccis going to get a view that is far from balanced and their opinions will follow.

No-one should peacefully protest in case the Government or media lie about it?