Britain once fought a war for freedom of speech and expression.Evidently we lost it!
That at least must be the conclusion drawn by an unnamed 15 year old, who is facing prosecution by Nanny's "finest" from the City of London police.
Was he a hoodie?
No!
Did he mug someone?
No!
Was he taking drugs?
No!
He used a "banned" word on a placard at a protest.
The word?
"CULT"
Yes, please note there is an "L" and no "N" in it!
Why is this word so evil?
Ah well you see he was using it to describe the Church of Scientology, when he took part in a peaceful demonstration opposite the London headquarters of "Church".
Officers have confiscated the placard, and a case file has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.
The incident happened during a protest against the Church of Scientology on May 10. The police decided that the word "CULT" was "abusive and insulting".
I can think of far more abusive and insulting words...can you children?
Ian Haworth, from the Cult Information Centre which provides advice for victims of cults and their families, said:
"This is an extraordinary situation. If it wasn't so serious it would be farcical. The police's job is to protect and serve. Who is being served and who is being protected in this situation? I find it very worrying.
Scientology is well known to my organisation, and has been of great concern to me for 22 years. I get many calls from families with loved ones involved and ex-members who are in need of one form of help."
Now why would the City of London police get so upset by this description of the Scientology "Church"?
Could it be the fact that more than 20 officers, ranging from constable to chief superintendent, have accepted gifts worth thousands of pounds from the Church of Scientology?
Could it be the fact that the City of London Chief Superintendent, Kevin Hurley, praised Scientology for "raising the spiritual wealth of society" during the opening of its headquarters in 2006.
Could it be that last year a video praising Scientology emerged featuring Ken Stewart, another of the City of London's chief superintendents?
Only a cynic would suggest that the police have a less than arms length relationship with this "religion".
By the way, in case you were wondering the group was founded by the science-fiction writer L Ron Hubbard in 1952, and espouses the idea that humans are descended from an exiled race of aliens called Thetans.
Hmmm...
Nice to see that some people are allowed freedom of speech and expression, whilst others are not!
Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with champagne. Click and drink!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Ken,
ReplyDeleteI recall the late great Kenneth Williams being refered to as a "cult figure" on some TV show or other. "Oh yes," he opioned nostrils flaring "I'm a cult alright, I'm the biggest cult you'll ever meet."
Much merriement from the aisles. Alas, Kenny was wrong the biggest cults one will meet nowadays are those 'running' the country. They do not share Mr William's sense of humour and perhaps are descended from space aliens, given the fact that they clearly exist on a planet far removed from the one we live on.
I find the Scientologists calling themselves a church to be offensive. Who do I have to bribe - sorry, send a present to - in order to have them prosecuted?
ReplyDeleteSurely, outside of the likelyhood that scientology IS a cult, this is a free speech issue. I mean surely........
ReplyDeletedebbie
Email I sent this morning to:
ReplyDeletepostmaster@cityoflondon.police.uk
" Sirs
Some people maintain that Scientology is a cult.
Others, however, maintain that it is not a cult, but is in fact a cult.
Personally, I believe they are all wrong and that it is nothing more than a money-hoovering cult
Yours
Morgan "
Reply (so far):
" NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED - NO DESCRIPTOR
Dear Morgan,
I have forwarded your email on to the appropriate department.
Yours Sincerely,
Postmaster,
CoLP. "
Let's wait and see, shall we?
We have had our freedom of speech cut in the UK for many years now under the guise of equality legislation. I didn't like it then and after reading this thread, I dislike it even more now.
ReplyDeleteWhen we have speech police and thought police in our country, one of our core beliefs is ridden rough shod over, namely freedom.
We must be allowed to freely express what we want to and in my opinion, that must include the right to, at times, offend someone.
Our freedoms are being more eroded every day and we must push our politicians to stop it now.
Political correctness has killed off our way of life and has silenced so many people, as they are afraid to be labeled some "ist" or other if they are clumsy with their use of language.
The 'Church' of Scientology is not recognised as a religion under British Law. Its use of the word to describe itself, and the signage on their buildings, is offensive to me as a Christian as it denigrates my place of worship.
ReplyDeleteThe 'Church' of Scientology is not recognised as a religion under British Law. Its use of the word to describe itself, and the signage on their buildings, is offensive to me as a Christian as it denigrates my place of worship.
ReplyDeleteI first read of this on the Guardian's Comment is Free, this morning.
ReplyDeleteThe thread has now been pulled.
Freedom of speech is essential, within reason (the old shouting 'fire!' in a cinema argument).
ReplyDeleteI'm a Christian too (although maybe a liberal one - I've never tried lard on toast and don't particularly want to, but I'll let you buy me a pint if we should ever meet). Do I get upset if people criticize Christianity or even call it a cult? Of course not.
If someone disagrees with your beliefs, then they disagree with your beliefs. That's it, and it's part of life. I don't expect legislation to protect my particular religious sensibilities, and neither should anyone else.
Crosses in urine presented as art? I've no problem with society tolerating it rather than the 'artist' being arrested/stoned/beheaded/*insert ugly death of choice* - it says more about the 'artist' than it does about anything else, so...so what? Where's the problem?
People in Iraq shooting at bibles, causing a religious uproar? No problem with that either; it's only a book, unless it means something personal to you...oh hang on, it was a Koran...never mind.
People with religious beliefs need to accept that not everyone accepts their opinion, and governments need to accept that protecting the feelings of Muslims or Scientologists or anyone else is not their concern; protecting our basic rights such as freedom of expression, are.
If people don't use the word 'cult', but have placards saying that the Scientologists screw people out of their money or cause family breakups, will that be illegal too? It means the same thing after all, but then the government would be making opinions, rather than just words, illegal.
So just where will all this end?
"governments need to accept that protecting the feelings of Muslims or Scientologists or anyone else is not their concern; protecting our basic rights such as freedom of expression, are."
ReplyDeleteHear, hear. Unfortunately the thin edge of a very large wedge is already in the door, dressed in a (scruffy) police uniform.
Just shows what the police know - the term 'cult' is used in academic circles as a kind of working definition. Debate is ongoing about the definition of a religion and, although there is broad agreement on which belief systems are to be considered among the major religions, there is a distinct blurring when it comes to minor religions. Depending on the terms of definition some of those belief systems will be considered either religions or cults. The police are evidently aware only of the pejorative sense of the word.
ReplyDeleteAs other posters have remarked, however, the real issue is that the police are overstepping their mark in sitting in judgment on matters of taste.
Reminds me of the 80s comedy programme "Not the Nine O'Clock News" in which one sketch portrayed an over-enthusiastic constable being hauled over the coals by a superior for arresting the same person for 'looking at you in a funny manner' and 'wearing a loud shirt' and so on (it was extremely funny but gets lost in translation!) It's very worrying indeed when the stuff of comedy becomes reality.
Joyce
"It's very worrying indeed when the stuff of comedy becomes reality.
ReplyDeleteJoyce"
Too bloody true.
Grant
Constable Savage
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZoSqPxsNtU
Interesting that you allude being a hoodie to the crimes of mugging and drug taking. Says a lot about your ideas of what freedom is.
ReplyDeleteJules
ReplyDeleteNanny puts hoodies in the same category as muggers etc